
1 1 I ff; 2_ 



\N~ 
























IPlibrary of Congress ' 

& ============= 



^ 



b 
B 

i 

m 

b 

P 

1 ^UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.Mil 
ro? 9-167 ^;<g>; 

bbbbbbctbbbbbbbbbb^bbbbbbbb 



Shelf 1^.^.^ 

1 mo 

8 



.-'• 



EXEGETICAL ESSAYS 



SEVERAL WORDS 



RELATING TO 



FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 



/ 



BY MOSES STUART, 
Professor of Sacred Literature in the Theol. Sein. at Andover. 



< $*$* of ^ 






ANDOYER: 

PRINTED AT THE CODMAN PRESS BY FLAGG AND GOULD, 

FOR PERKINS AND MARVIN, No. 114, 

WASHINGTON ST., BOSTON. 

1830. 



I 






*>b 



^K 



v^ 



DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, to wit! 

District Clerk's Office. 
Be it remembered, that on the 6th day of Oct. A. D. 1830, in the fifty-nftk 
year of the Independence of the United States of America, Perkins & Marvin 
of the said district, have deposited in this Office the title of a book, the right 
whereof they claim as Proprietors, in the words following, to wit ; " Exegetical 
Essays on several words relating to Future Punishment. By Moses Stuart, Pro- 
fessor of Sacred Literature in the Theological Seminary at Andover." In confor- 
mity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, " An Act for the en- 
couragement of Learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to 
the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned :" 
and also to an act entitled, " An act supplementary to an act, entitled, An act 
for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts and 
books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies during the times therein 
mentioned ; and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving' 
and etching historical and other prints." 



JOHN W D4VI«5 i Clerk °f the District 



PREFACE. 



As no subject can be presented to the human mind so deeply 
interesting as the inquiry, whether we shall be happy or misera- 
ble in a future world through endless ages ; so no apology is need- 
ed, for choosing such a topic of discussion in the following pages. 
Very many embrace the opinion, that the present is not our only 
state of probation ; and of course, that if our lot be that of punish- 
ment in a future world, yet our condition even then is not to be 
regarded as hopeless. Has this any foundation in the Word of 
God, or does it proceed rather from our wishes than from reason 
and evidence ? 

The following pages do not profess to treat of these questions 
at large. It would require a volume of much greater size than the 
present, to do even tolerable justice to the whole subject. My 
design, however, is to discuss, almost entirely in a philological 
way, some of the most interesting topics relative to future punish- 
ment. This I have endeavoured to do, unembarrassed by any par- 
ticular opinions or systems. My conscience bears me testimony, 
that I have endeavoured to come at my subject, in the way of an 
original and disinterested inquirer. If I have not always succeed- 
ed in doing this, I must beg the reader to attribute it to human in- 
firmity, and not to design. 

That I have not referred, in the general course of discussion, 
to those who differ from me in opinion, (one instance only except- 
ed), they must not put to the score of neglect; for neither have I 
referred to those with whom I agree. My wish is, not to appear 
in a polemic attitude, on the one hand ; nor in that of one who ap- 
peals for support to mere human authority, on the other. I hope 
this will not be considered as betraying any neglect of my oppo- 
nents, or overlooking of those with whom I agree. Simple, phi- 
lological disquisition, conducted by approved rules of interpreta- 
tion, and unembarrassed by friend or foe to my own views, is what 
I have aimed at. How far I have succeeded, must be left, of 
course, to the judgement of my readers. 



IV PREFACE. 

One thing I do earnestly desire to say to the reader with affec- 
tion and deep concern ; c Look well to it how thou examinest and 
judgest ; it is for thy life !' If it were a matter of taste, or of com- 
mon lexicographal or grammatical dispute, it would be of little 
consequence to give such an admonition ; for the consequences 
could not be very important. But it is not so here ; for the inter- 
ests of eternity may be connected with the decision which the rea- 
der will make. As a philologist, I am unable to doubt the certain- 
ty of the conclusions to which the examination that is detailed in 
the following sheets has led me. Deeply impressed with this my- 
self, it is natural that I should wish to impress others in like man- 
ner. If they do not agree with me, after examining the subject, 
they will not, I trust, take umbrage at the manner in which it has 
been brought before them. 

In regard to the writer in the Christian Examiner, whose sen- 
timents are briefly reviewed in p. 72 seq., my only apology for de- 
parting from the general rule which I have observed, and making 
opposition to him, is the earnest solicitation of some respected 
friends that I should take this course. I would rather have avoid- 
ed it; but since I have done it. and the writer has replied in the 
Christian Examiner for Sept. 1830, I feel it to be my duty still 
farther to notice his reply; which I have done in a brief Appendix 
at the end of this little volume. 

As my object is discussion on original and fundamental 
grounds, which have respect to the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, 
so it must follow, that my book can be read intelligibly through- 
out, only by such as have some knowledge of these languages. 
Yet I have endeavoured so to write, that intelligent readers, un- 
acquainted with Hebrew and Greek, may get at the scope of my 
arguments ; and I would fain hope that in this I have succeeded. 

I only add, that the time seems to have come, when appeal to 
the original Scriptures appears to be the only effectual method of 
satisfying the public mind, in regard to any controverted religious 
subject. That there is a portion of the public who will not be sat- 
isfied even with this, I deeply regret, but am constrained to be- 
lieve. Yet since far the greater part profess to believe in the de- 
clarations of the Bible, to this I have made the appeal ; and by 
this only I desire the doctrine in question, and my little treatise 
respecting it, to be tried. 

M. STUART. 
Andover, Oct. 1830. 



JJJIN and AIJINIOZ. 



§ 1. Importance of the subject. 

To a being endowed with a spirit which can never 
cease to exist, and who can live at most but a few years 
in the present world, the question, What is to be his fu- 
ture condition ? is the most important question that can 
possibly be agitated. Will his condition after death be 
unchangeable ? Will his probation be at an end, when 
his present life shall cease ? And if so, on what does the 
happiness or misery of his future state depend ? 

An instinctive desire of happiness and dread of misery, 
form an elementary part of the nature which man posses- 
ses. They are interwoven with the very being of his 
soul, and must be immortal as the spirit from which they 
spring. At the prospect of happiness, he is filled w T ith 
delightful anticipations, which make existence a blessing, 
and cause the soul to exult in the possession of its powers 
and capacities ; at the prospect of misery without relief 
and without end, an instinctive horror closes every aven- 
ue of pleasure, and the soul loathes its own existence, and 
would fain resign the possession of it. 

This, however, it cannot do. He who made us in his 
own image, made us immortal like himself; immortal in 
regard to the powers and faculties, as well as the exis- 
tence, of the soul ; the immortal subjects, therefore, of 
2 



6 § 1. j4l(x)v and jjuoviog. 

happiness or misery in the future state. We can no 
more cease to be the subjects of the one or the other, 
than we can cease to be what we are — rational, sentient 
beings, whose very constitution, whose essential nature, 
necessarily involves with its existence the experience of 
either happiness or misery. 

However discrepant the views of men may be, in 
some respects, with regard to our condition in a future 
state, there will be — there can be — no important differ- 
ence of opinion in regard to the point now under consid- 
eration ; at least, there can be no important difference, 
among those who believe in the immortality of the soul. 
To all such, then, the questions, Whether we shall be 
happy or miserable in another world ? and, Whether we 
shall be unchangeably so? are of such unspeakable mo- 
ment, as to make all other questions appear to be of com- 
paratively small importance. 

How are these great questions to be answered ? The 
immortal soul, that is not sunk in the grossest ignorance, 
or rendered insensible by the most debasing sensuality 
and love of the world, cannot but feel an interest — an all- 
pervading interest — in this inquiry. Good men exhibit 
their interest in it, by long-continued and solicitous in- 
quiries into their spiritual condition and prospects ; and 
even the wicked, in most cases, exhibit their interest also 
in the question, by their constant efforts, in one way and 
another, to bring themselves into a condition of quiet with 
regard to it. 

All sober and rational men will surely be disposed to 
ask, From what quarter can these all-important inquiries 
have light thrown upon them ? What cheering sun is 
there, which will shed his radiance over the darkness 
that rests upon them, and disclose the object of them to 
us by the full light of day ? 



§ 1. Aiwv and Aiwvioq. 7 

And is not the answer to these last inquiries compar- 
atively easy ? The light of nature can never scatter the 
darkness in question. This light has never yet sufficed 
to make even the question clear, to any portion of our 
benighted race, Whether the soul of man is immortal ? 
Cicero, incomparably the most able defender of the soul's 
immortality of which the heathen world can yet boast, 
very ingenuously confesses, that after all the arguments 
which he had adduced in order to confirm the doctrine 
in question, it so fell out, that his mind was satisfied of 
it, only when directly employed in contemplating the ar- 
guments adduced in its favor. At all other times, he fell 
unconsciously into a state of doubt and darkness. 

It is notorious, also, that Socrates, the next most able 
advocate among the heathen for the same doctrine, has 
adduced arguments to establish the never-ceasing exis- 
tence of the soul, which will not bear the test of examin- 
ation. Such is the argument by which he endeavors to 
prove, that we shall always continue to exist because we 
always have existed ; and this last proposition he labors 
to establish, on the ground that all our present acquisi- 
tions of knowledge are only so many i*emini$cences of 
what we formerly knew, in a state of existence antecedent 
to our present one. Unhappy lot of philosophy, to be 
doomed thus to prop itself up, with supports so weak and 
fragile as this ! How can the soul be filled with consola- 
tion, in prospect of death, without some better and more 
cheering light than can spring from such a source ? How 
can it quench its thirst for immortality, by drinking in 
such impure and turbid streams as these ? Poor wan- 
dering heathen ! How true it is — and what a glorious, 
blessed truth it is — that " life and immortality are brought 
to light in the gospel !" It is equally true, that they are 
brought to light only there. 



8 § 1. Aiwv and u4lvjvLog. 

Thus much then, is certainly plain. If the heathen 
did not, and (all their circumstances and passions consid- 
ered) could not, sufficiently answer the inquiry which re- 
spects the immortal existence of the soul ; much less 
could they satisfactorily answer the question, Whether 
our future state is to be happy or miserable 2 And if 
either, On what conditions is our happiness or misery 
suspended? These awfully momentous questions, they 
never did answer. 'The world by wisdom knew not 
God.' Nor did they know that he had made man in his 
own image ; much less that man had been redeemed by 
the death of God's own beloved Son. They did not 
know any thing definite, respecting either the happiness 
which the gospel proffers to the penitent and obedient, or 
the miseries which are threatened to the impenitent and 
disobedient, in the world to come. 

Nor has all the light which has been cast upon the 
subject of the soul's immortality, since the gospel was 
first published, enabled men, independently of the gos- 
pel itself, to demonstrate this truth ; certainly not to 
shew, with any good degree of satisfaction, what the fu- 
ture state of the soul will be. 

If there be any satisfactory light, then, on the mo- 
mentous question of a future state, it must be sought from 
the word of God. After all the toil and pains of casuists 
and philosophers, it remains true, that the gospel, and the 
gospel only, has ' brought life and immortality to light' in 
a satisfactory manner. 

Most men among us either expressly acknowledge 
this, or else implicitly concede it. The latter even those 
do, who make strenuous efforts to shew that the Scriptures 
can be construed in such a way, as to render the doctrine 
of the ultimate, universal happiness of mankind at least 



§ 1. Ah&v and Aiwvibg. 9 

probable ; although, at the same time, unconsciously per- 
haps to themselves, they reason from principles which are 
not deduced from the Scriptures, but from their own ap- 
prehensions in regard to what is proper or improper un- 
der the divine government of rational beings. 

The Bible, then, is the only sure source of knowledge, 
in regard to the future destiny of our race. This alone 
is to be relied on, in the ultimate settlement of the great 
question, whether we are to be forever happy or miser- 
able. 

But how is this question to be settled by the Bible ? 
Is this to be done, by carrying along with us, when we 
go to interpret the Bible, principles which decide before- 
hand what in our view the Bible ought to speak, and to 
draw from these, conclusions as to what it does speak ? 
Is any other book on earth interpreted in this manner ? 
Or at least if it be so, do not all men declaim against 
the unfairness and the partiality of such an interpreta- 
tion ? After all, surely it cannot be for the ultimate in- 
terest of any intelligent and rational being, who is favored 
with the Scriptures, to force on them a method of inter- 
pretation which he would complain of, when applied to 
any other book. It cannot be for his ultimate interest, 
to make a mistake in respect to the tremendous subject 
of a future state. iVbove all, if it should at last prove to 
be true, that the present life is the only state of proba- 
tion for men, a mistake as to the consequences of this 
probation, must be of an importance which no language 
can describe, and of which no heart can even conceive. 

And even supposing that there is a future state of pro- 
bation, which is disciplinary, and in which the wicked 
are subjected to pain and distress ; what reasonable and 
considerate man would desire to incur the risk of this, by 



10 <§ 1. Alow and Alwvioq. 

flattering himself in such a way as to continue in his sin- 
ful course while in the present world, and venture upon 
the consequences of this in the world to come ? 

May it not be hoped, then, amid the conflicting spirit 
of the times, and the widely spread belief that all our race 
will eventually be happy in another world, that there are 
some, at least, who will feel it to be the?r duty and their 
interest, seriously and impartially to examine and con- 
sider what the Scriptures have said, relative to the impor- 
tant question about the duration of future happiness and 
misery ? I must hope that there are at least some, (who 
have as yet been wandering in uncertainty, and who may 
have inclined, or rather have wished, to believe that they 
shall be finally happy, and that the Bible has not decided 
the question against the ultimate hopes of those that die 
in a state of impenitency), who will now consent serious- 
ly and carefully to examine the ground of their hopes and 
wishes, and to be guided by the sentiments of the Bible, 
investigated by means of the usual and impartial princi- 
ples of interpretation. 

For such, the following investigation is specially in- 
tended. It is not my design to occupy the ivhole ground, 
covered by the great question which relates to the inqui- 
ry, Whether our condition in a future world is immuta- 
ble ? To do this, would require a volume instead of a 
few pages. It would so multiply topics of consideration, 
also, as to have a tendency rather to distract and confuse 
the mind, than to enlighten and satisfy it in the most sim- 
ple way. 

I purposely avoid, therefore, all remarks here on ob- 
jections against the doctrine of endless future punish- 
ment, drawn from considerations respecting the divine 
benevolence, which the minds of many men appear to en- 



§ 1. Alwv and Aim v tog. 11 

tertain, in consequence of reasoning abstractedly and in- 
dependently of the Scriptures about the nature of God 
and the desert of sin. To settle the question whether 
endless punishment is possible, before we come to the 
Scriptures for investigation ; and then to search them 
merely to see whether we cannot find something to con- 
firm our views, or to remove the difficulties which the 
Bible throws in our way ; is virtually to renounce the 
Scriptures as our guide, and to set up our own conclu- 
sions and reasonings in the place of them. But how are 
men to answer to their own consciences, and to that God 
who is the author of the Bible, for so doing ? And after 
all, what is to be the ultimate rule of the divine proceed- 
ings, in regard to us ? Are we at our own disposal ? Or 
are we in the hands of an almighty God ? Are our views 
and conceptions to be the rule of his dealings with us ; 
or are his own views of right and wrong, of merit and de- 
sert, to guide his disposal of us and ours ? Supposing, 
then, that with the utmost confidence we cherish and ad- 
vocate principles, in regard to the administration of the 
divine government, which in the end turn out to be in- 
consistent with the statutes of heaven as contained in the 
Bible ; what influence will our belief and opinions have 
on the eternal Judge, in the great day of retribution ? 
Can they have any 1 And if not, of what avail is it for 
us to argue and decide, independently of the Bible, and 
to risk our eternal salvation on conclusions which are 
made out in this manner ? 

I would hope that such considerations as these, may 
have a tendency to check the proneness of some minds, 
to indulge in a priori speculations on this great subject; 
and may help in persuading them, to lend a listening ear 
to any serious and impartial attempt, to describe the real 
state of Scripture testimony in regard to it. 



12 § 1. Alwv and Alwviog. 

For the subject of the present investigation,* I have 
chosen only one word, or (more correctly perhaps) only 
one species of words, used by the writers of the New 
Testament. It is in the New Testament that ' life and 
immortality are brought to light ;' and it is there too, 
that we may of course expect the state and duration of 
either reward or punishment in the future world, to be 
most fully and clearly revealed. I seek not doubtful evi- 
dence. I aim to exhibit that which is, or ought to be, 
convincing. At least, I intend to exhibit that which my 
own mind is unable to resist ; and which, I would hope, 
may assist others in their inquiries relative to our subject. 

The words that I have selected for present investiga- 
tion, are aioiv and ahovtog, commonly translated forever, 
ever, eternal, everlasting ; specially so translated, when 
they are connected with objects that relate to the invisi- 
ble world. I have been induced to select these words, 
because I have, at various times, and specially of late, 
met with not a few speculations and criticisms on them, 
which are singular, and (in my view) widely departing 
from the sober rules of legitimate interpretation. I have 
seen, to my deep regret, many remarks on this awful sub- 
ject, which seem to betray much levity and inconsidera- 
tion of mind ; and not a few, also, which disclose a re- 
solute determination, (come what will of the laws of ex- 
egesis), to support notions on the subject of a future state, 
that have been adopted independently of Scriptural in- 
quiry, and seem to be maintained in spite of all which 
the Bible has declared. 

I hope I shall not expose myself to censure here, by 
speaking thus respecting criticisms of this nature. I 
would not treat with disregard any opinion in theology 

* This refers only to the first Essay in the present Volume. 



§ 1. Altuv and Alojpiog. 13 

or criticism, which appears to be the offspring of serious 
investigation and real effort to seek after the truth, al- 
though its author may have greatly mistaken the path of 
truth. But when I see rash and adventurous criticisms 
thrown out before the public, which are evidently the 
offspring neither of patient investigation, nor yet of a se- 
rious desire to know what the Bible has decided, but in- 
tended only to remove the difficulties which the Scrip- 
tures throw in the way of opinions entertained by the au- 
thors of such criticisms, and to lull the consciences of 
men who are uneasy about the subject of future punish- 
ment, I feel constrained at least to make an effort, to 
bring before the public a full investigation of the mean- . 
ing of the words in question, and to afford them, if it be 
in my power, more easy and ample means of judging in 
regard to the criticisms above named, than is afforded by 
any of the popular works now generally read. 

I must advertise my readers, that in order to do this, 
I cannot confine myself to a merely popular exhibition 
of the evidence with regard to the words in question. 
Their importance in respect to the great subject of a fu- 
ture state, all must acknowledge who have any good ac- 
quaintance with the Scriptures. They form, indeed, the 
leading testimony in regard to the evidence which re- 
spects the duration of future punishment. But then, 
let it be remembered also, they are far from constituting 
the only testimony of the Scriptures, in respect to this 
subject. I desire that this may be very explicitly under- 
stood. It is not my design, for the present, to aim at ad- 
ducing all the evidence relative to future punishment 
which the Scriptures afford, but only to examine one 
important part of it ; and this, because it has of late 
been so often drawn into question. 



14 § 1 . Alia v and AIoj viog. 

It will be easily seen by every intelligent reader, that 
I cannot appeal to the Scriptural usage of the words aiwv 
and aicoviog, in such a way as to make the investigation 
a fundamental one, without a reference throughout to the 
original Scriptures. These are the only legitimate source 
of ultimate appeal, in all controverted subjects of religion. 
It is to these, indeed, that such of the advocates of uni- 
versal salvation as are able to do it, profess to make an 
appeal. I must, therefore, take the same ground ; and 
yet, while I do this, I would hope to make myself intelli- 
gible in most cases to all well-educated readers, although 
they do not possess a knowledge of the Original. A few 
things must, in an investigation like the present, neces- 
sarily be without the circle of their apprehension. But I 
would fain hope, that this will not detract from the gener- 
al impression which the present essay is designed to make. 



In pursuing the inquiry about the Scriptural meaning 
of alwv and aicoviog (for ever and everlasting), I pro- 
pose to investigate, the meaning of these words among 
profane Greek writers ; their meaning in the New Testa- 
ment ; the meaning of the corresponding words in the Old 
Testament, which have been translated by uiojv and alca- 
vvog ; the meaning of these last words in the Septuagint ; 
then to present a brief view of the bearing, which the tes- 
timony exhibited in respect to these words has on the du- 
ration of future punishment ; and lastly, to make some re- 
marks on the abuse of these words, and on some mistaken 
criticisms with regard to them. 



§§ 2. 3. Alow and Alwvioq. 15 

^ 2. Classical use of the words in question. 

Respecting this, there can be but little or no doubt. 
Alow means, (1) Length or space of time ; and so, time 
of life, age of man, age considered as a space of time. 
(2) Long time, eternity, long indefinite space of time. 
These are the usual significations of the word, as given 
by those excellent lexicographers, Schneider and Passow. 
There is a third unusual meaning sometimes attached to 
this word, viz. mark, which has no bearing on our present 
inquiry, and seems to have arisen from a mistaken deri- 
vation of the word from utw, to notice, to mark. 

The word mojvtog, as defined by Passow, means 
long-continuing, everlasting, eternal; and with this 
Schneider agrees. 

Most of the shades of meaning which these words 
have in the classics, are also given to them in Scriptural 
usage ; and along with these, some others also which are 
peculiar to the writers of Hebrew-Greek. No one ac- 
quainted with the nature of this Greek, will wonder at 
this. A great proportion of the Greek words employed 
in the New Testament and the Septuagint, is used in a 
similar manner. Not only do they bear many senses for- 
eign to classic usage, but many of them are employed in 
a manner wholly foreign to the Greek classical authors. 
If any one desires proof of this — overwhelming proof — 
he has only to inspect a few pages of Schleusner, or of 
Ward's Lexicon of the New Testament, which will solve 
all his doubts. 

§ 3. The meaning of the words in question, as employed 
by the writers of the Neio Testament. 

On this inquiry, of course, depends substantially th 
issue of w the question before us. I must beg my readers 



16 § 3. Alow and Alojviog. 

therefore to have patience, and to bear with me while I en- 
deavor to conduct them, step by step, through every in- 
stance in which the words ccIojv and almvcog are employ- 
ed in the New Testament. 

There are shorter methods of dispatching the subject 
in hand ; and these are, either to decide it by affirming 
positively in regard to it, and substituting this for a la- 
bored process of proof; or by producing a few instances 
which may seem to support the theory advanced by any 
writer, and neglecting the rest ; or lastly, by conjectur- 
ing what the words in question ought to mean, instead of 
proving what they do mean. 

But as I have engaged in the severe task of endeavor- 
ing to make a thorough examination, I cannot knowingly 
adopt either of these methods. I have endeavored to 
take a view of the whole ground for myself; and I am now 
desirous to submit the results of this labor to the inspec- 
tion of others, who are willing seriously and laboriously 
to inquire, what they ought to believe in respect to the 
momentous subject before us. 

If there be any future punishment, it belongs of course 
to a future state, i. e. to the invisible world. Our first 
inquiry then will naturally be, In what sense are the words 
alciv and ahovioQ employed, ivhen used icith reference to 
the things of the invisible world 1 

I omit all those cases in which these words are con- 
nected with the subject of punishment , for the present. I 
shall inquire, first of all, how they are employed in regard 
to all other things belonging to the invisible world ? i. e. to 
all other objects which exist there, or to transactions, oc- 
currences, condition, or circumstances, belonging to 
that world. 



Alow* 17 

§ 4. Meaning of Alwv. 
First general class of meanings. 

As the most common and appropriate meaning of 
ctltov, in the New Testament, and the one which best ac- 
cords with the corresponding Hebrew word tibi^ , (which 
the Septuagint nearly always renders by aiojv), and which 
therefore deserves the first rank in regard to order, I put 
down, 

(1) An indefinite period of time ; time icitliout limita- 
tion ; ever, forever, time without end, eternity ; all in re- 
lation to the future. 

As to the various instances now to be cited, the rea- 
der will see, that some one or other of these shades of 
meaning applies to all. If he be accustomed to philologi- 
cal and exegetical studies, he will also perceive, that so 
far as the simple idea of the word almv is concerned, the 
sense of it is substantially the same, in all the cases now 
to be designated ; and that the different shades by which 
the word is rendered, depend on the object with which 
aiojp is associated, or to which it has a relation, rather 
than on any differences in the real meaning of alciv itself. 
The idea which this word preserves through the whole., 
is that of unlimited, indefinite time ; which > in one case, 
in consequence of its connection, must be rendered ever, 
(joined with a negative, never) ; in another, forever, etc., 
in all the various ways already mentioned above. 

To the following instances I now make the appeal, in 
confirmation of what has just been stated. 



(a) I begin with those which have reference to God, (or 
to Christ), to what belongs to him, or is rendered, or will 
be rendered to him, and which (from his nature and the 
3 



18 §4. Meaning of Alcov. 

nature of things) cannot be supposed ever to have an end, 
or ever to cease from existing, or from being rendered, etc. 

Rom. 1: 25, the Creator, who is blessed forever , tig 
rovg cdcovccQ' surely, not merely for a period which is to 
have an end ! 

Rom. 9: 5, God over all, blessed forever, tig xovg al- 
covctg' plainly in the same sense as above. 

Rom. 11: 36, to whom be glory for ever, tig rovg al- 
ow ag. 

Rom. 16: 27, to the only wise God .... be glory for- 
ever, tig rovg alcovag. 

2 Cor. 11: 31, God . . . who is blessed forever, tig 
xovg alcovag. 

Gal. 1: 5, to whom [God] be glory forever and ever, 
tig rovg aioopag xcov aiwvcov. 

Eph. 3: 21, to him [God] be glory .... to all the 
generations of the age of ages or of eternity, xov alwvog 
Ttov cciwvcov i. e. to him be eternal glory. The form of 
expression is plainly intensive here. 

Phil. 4: 20, to God .... be glory forever and ever, 



tig rovg alwvag xcov aiojvcov. 



1 Tim. 1: 17, to God .... be glory for ever and ever, 
tig xovg aiojvag xcov aicovcov. 

2 Tim. 4: 18, to whom [to the Lord] be glory forev- 
er and ever, tig rovg alcovag xcZv alcovcov. 

Heb. 13: 21, to him [God, or Christ] be glory forev- 
er and ever, tig xovg alcovag xojv alcovcov. 

1 Pet. 1: 25, the word of the Lord abideth forever, 
tig xov alcova. 

1 Pet. 4: 11, to whom [God, or Christ] be glory and 
praise forever and ever, tig xovg alcovag xcov alcovcov. 

1 Pet. 5: 11, to him [God] be glory and praise forev- 
er and ever, tig xovg alcovag acov aloivcov. 



§ 4. Meaning of Alwv. 19 

2 Pet. 3: 18, to him [Christ] be glory both now and 
forever, vvv kccl tig ^a'auv aiwvog. 

Rev. 1: 6, to him [to God] be glory and praise for- 
ever and ever, eig xovg alwvag xwv aiojvcov. 

Rev. 1: 18, and behold ! I [Christ] live forever and 
ever, elg xovg aloovccg xwv aioovcov. 

Rev. 4: 9, glory and honour .... to him [God, or 
Christ], who liveth forever and ever, elg xovg aiojvag xwv 

OilQjVWP. 

Rev. 4: 10, they worshipped him [God, or Christ] 
who liveth forever and ever, elg xovg aiojvag xwv alco- 
vwv. 

Rev. 7: 12, blessing and glory .... to our God for 
ever and ever, rig xovg aiojvag xcov aloivow. 

Rev. 10: 6, [the angel] sware by him who liveth for- 
ever and ever, tig xovg aiojvag xoop alcovwv. 

Rev. 15: 7, vials filled with the wrath of God, who 
liveth forever and ever, elg xovg alwvag xcjv alcovojv. 



(6) The second class of texts under the present gener- 
al head, are those which have reference to the happine<> 
of the pious, especially to their happiness in heaven or tin 
future world. 

Of this tenor are the following ; viz. 

John 6: 51, if any one eat of this bread, he shall live 
forever, elg xdv aloZva' i. e. he shall be happy always 
without end. 

John 6: 58, the same expression, in the same sense. 

John 8: 51, if any one shall keep my word, he shall 
never see death, ov . . e . elg xov alcova* by which expres- 
sion, the never-ending happiness of the righteous is sure- 
ly designated. 



20 § 4. Meaning of Alwv. 

John 8: 52, he shall never taste of death, ov . . . . elg 
rov aiojvct: in the same sense as in the preceding exam- 
ple. 

John 10: 28, they shall never perish, ov . . . . elg xov 
alwvw where the endless happiness of the righteous is 
clearly asserted. 

John 11: 26, he that believeth in me shall never die, 
ov , . . . elg rov aloivw to the same purpose as the above 
Example. 

2 Cor. 9: 9, his righteousness abideth forever, elg top 
aicovcc i. e. his charitable benevolence shall be eternally 
rewarded. 

1 John 2: 17, he who doeth the will of God, shall 
abide forever, elg xov cclojva' i. e. he shall ever be secure 
and happy. 

Rev. 22: 5, they [the servants of God] shall reign 
forever and ever, elg xovg alwvag xwv aloivcov' i. e. shall 
occupy a station of exalted dignity and happiness forever. 



(c) Another application of alow, in a sense that clas- 
ses under our first general head, is, to designate a 'period 
unlimited or without bounds, i. e. ever, and (with a nega- 
tive) never. This is clear from the following examples ; 
viz. 

Matt. 21: 19, let there be no fruit of thee forever, elg 
rov ctlwvcc. The words have respect to the fig tree which 
was cursed. That an unlimited, i. e. endless period is 
here meant, seems very plain ; for it has respect to all 
future time. 

Mark 11: 14, the same words, in the same sense. 

Mark 3: 29, whoever shall blaspheme against the Ho- 
ly Ghost, shall never have forgiveness, ovx . . . . elg xov 
alwva. Comp. under No. 4. a. Matt. 12: 32. 



§4. Meaning of yllo'w. 21 

Luke 1: 33, he (Jesus) shall reign over the house of 
David forever, elg rovg aiwvag. There may be some dif- 
ference of opinion here, as to the class of meanings to 
which the phrase elg zovg atwvag, is to be assigned. 
The majority of interpreters give to it the sense of forever, 
and appeal to the nature of the Messiah's kingdom, and 
also to the corresponding assertion in the latter part of v. 
33, " of his kingdom there shall be no end, ova .... xe- 
?>og" On the other hand, interpreters who construe tig 
rovg aiwvccg somewhat differently, appeal to 1 Cor. 15: 
24 — 28, in order to shew that the kingdom of the Mes- 
siah is to have an end, and that therefore the expression 
in question is to be regarded only as designating an in- 
definite period, a very long time. They add, too, that the 
passage in Luke plainly has a relation to the kingdom of 
Christ as Messiah; a kingdom which must cease, of 
course, when the office of Messiah ceases, which will be 
after the general judgement, 1 Cor. 15: 24 — 28. The 
reasoning of the latter seems to be weighty ; and I should 
feel bound to accede to it, unless it might be said, with 
propriety, that there is a spiritual kingdom, one purely of 
a moral kind and adapted to the heavenly world, that will 
continue after the appropriate reign of Jesus as Messiah 
shall cease. This is certainly favoured by those passages 
in the New Testament, which ascribe endless dominion 
and power to the Son of God in the same manner as to 
the Father ; e. g. Rev. 5: 13. 11: 15. Heb. 1: 8. On the 
whole, I am rather inclined to class elg rovg aiuvag here, 
with those passages which designate an unlimited period ; 
particularly because of the ovx .... rekog, which follows 
in the same verse. Yet I should not be very confident 
in maintaining this classification, for the reasons stated 

above. 

3 # 



22 § 4. Meaning of Alwv. 

If I am correct, the passage might be classed under 
(a) above. 

Luke 1: 55, [God] remembered mercy to Abraham 
and his seed forever, ecog amvog ; i. e. he always, ever 
has remembered, and ever will remember, mercy to Abra- 
ham and his seed ; he is unchangeably and perpetually 
propitious to them. This text might be referred, also, 
to the class (6) above. 

John 4: 14, whoever shall drink of the water which I 
shall give him, shall never thirst, ov . . . . elg xov aloZva ; 
a full negative, and for a period plainly without any limi- 
tation. This also might be referred to the class (6) above. 

John 8: 35, the servant abideth not forever, elg xov 
alwva, but the Son abideth forever, elg top alwva. Here 
an unlimited period, a time that has no bounds, is plain- 
ly designated. 

John 12: 34, we have heard out of the law, that Christ 
abideth forever, elg xov alwva. The passage expresses 
the opinion of the Jews in regard to the Messiah, who, 
they supposed, would be altogether exempt from death. 
Of course alwva here means, an unlimited or endless pe- 
riod. 

John 13: 8, thou shalt never wash my feet, ov . . . elg 
xov alwva. 

John 14: 16, that he [the Comforter] may abide with 
you forever, elg xov alwva. Here always, i. e. constant- 
ly and for an unlimited time, is plainly the idea convey- 
ed by elg xov alwva. 

1 Cor. 8: 13, I will never eat flesh, ov . . . . elg xov 
alwva. 

Heb. Ir 8, thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, elg 
xov alwva xov alwvog. The idea which this expresses, 
seems to be the same as that in Luke 1 : 33 above : which 



§4. Meaning of Alwv. 23 

see. It may be remarked here, in confirmation of what 
will be said by and by about the use of the singular and 
plural number, that elg top alcova tov cclcovog differs not 
at all, in sense, from tig xovg alojpctg xcov alojvojp. 

Heb. 5: 6, thou art a high priest forever, elg top al- 
wva* i. e. for a period unlimited, undefined, a very long 
period ; forever, while the nature of things shall permit 
or require this office. 

Heb. 6: 20, Jesus .... made high priest for ever, elg 
rov alojvcc in the same sense as above. 

Heb. 7: 17, thou art a priest forever, elg tov alcuva' 
in the same sense as before. 

Heb. 7: 21, the same expression, in the same sense. 

Heb. 7: 24, but he, because he remaineth [a priest] 
forever, elg tov aloZva' in reference to the same subject 
as the three last examples above. 

Heb. 7: 28, but the word of the oath . . . maketh the 
Son [high priest], who is exalted to a state of glory for- 
ever, elg tov alaiva. This might be ranked under No. 
1.6; but I have chosen to arrange it here, in conse- 
quence of its intimate connection with the four preceding 
texts. 

Heb. 13: 8, Jesus Christ the same yesterday, to day, 
and forever, elg Tovg cclcjvag' i. e. Jesus Christ invariably, 
always the same. 

2 John v. 2, [the truth] shall be with you always, 
elg tov alojvcc. 

Rev. 5: 12, to Him that sitteth on the throne, and to 
ttie lamb, be ... . glory and power forever and ever, elg 
Tovg alcjvug tow uIojvwv. This might be ranged under 
(a) above. 

Rev. 11: 15, he [Christ] shall reign forever and ever, 
elgrovg ulojvccg tojv alojvojv. See on Luke 1: 33 above. 



24 § 4. Meaning of Aiwv. 



Thus far all the examples which have been cited, re- 
fer to future time. But there is another small class of 
examples, in which aiojv refers to past time, and which 
require a distinct head of enumeration. They are of a 
nature kindred with the various species of meaning al- 
ready mentioned under No. 1. a. b. c ; and therefore I 
shall designate them here as belonging to No. 2, under 
the general arrangement. I observe then, 

(2) That alihv sometimes means, an indefinite or long 
period in time past, ancient days, times of old, long ago, 
always in time past, generations or ages long since. 

Of this tenor are the following passages ; viz. 

Luke 1: 70, as he [God] promised by the mouth of 
his holy prophets in ancient times, or of his holy prophets 
long ago, an alcovog. 

Acts 15: 18, Known unto God of old, an aiwvog, 
are all his works ; i. e. God knew all his works from the 
most ancient times, or always in times past. 

1 Cor. 2: 7, which God decreed long ago or ages 
since, ngo twv aicovotv' i. e. from eternity. 

Eph. 3: 9, the mystery hidden in God from ages, dno 
rwv aiwvoov i. e. hidden during all ages past, or always 
hidden during ages past. 

Eph. 3: 11, according to the purpose of ages, tcoV ai- 
d)vo)v' i. e. according to the ancient or eternal purpose. 

Col. 1; 26, the mystery hidden from ages, ano t&v 
aiojvtov' in the same sense as Eph. 3: 9 above. 

Under this head also should be classed John 9: 32, 
never was it heard, in rov accovog ovx yxova&t], that one 
opened the eyes of him that was born blind ; i. e. during 
all ages past, or from the most ancient time, such a thing 
has not been heard of. 



§ 4. Meaning of Altov. 25 



The cases which I shall next rank under No. 3, may 
not appear, at first view, to be very nearly related to those 
already exhibited. But the experienced interpreter will 
easily perceive, that there is in them a tacit reference to 
the idea of age, period of time, seculum ; and also, that 
this has particular reference to quantity of time as a 
whole, and may relate either to a past, or a future age. 
In accordance with this, then, we may say, 

(3) That aiojp occasionally means, age in the sense 
of dispensation, viz. age (Jewish), age (Christian). 

In this case, it is obviously employed as we employ 
the word age in English, when we speak of the patriarch- 
al age, the antediluvian age, etc. Of this meaning may 
be found the following examples ; viz. 

1 Cor. 10: 11, on whom the ends of the age (ages) 
have come, zgjv aloSvcDV i. e. who live at the close of the 
Jewish age or dispensation. 

Eph. 2: 7, that he might shew in the ages to come, Iv 
to7q aiwGi, ro7g ineQio^tvotg, the exceeding riches of his 
grace. This may be construed of the [gospel] ages ; or 
it may be taken in the general sense of secula. The for- 
mer is consonant with New Testament usage ; but the 
latter is, perhaps, the more probable sense. 

Heb. 6: 5, who have tasted the good promise of God, 
and the powers of the age to come, [AtllovTog aiwvog* 
i. e. of the miraculous powers bestowed under the gospel 
dispensation. 

These are all the examples which occur, that require 
to be ranked under this head ; and of these, Eph. 2. 7 
might be ranked under another category, and considered 
merely as an example of the classical sense of alcov, viz. 
seculum, aevum, age simply considered. 



26 §5. Meaning of Alwv. 

It will be perceived, that most of the meanings of 
altov under the preceding heads, are in accordance with 
those which the word not unfrequently has in the Greek 
classic writers. In this respect, however, the New Tes- 
tament usage differs from the classical one, viz. in that 
aiciv, in the New Testament, most usually means, an in- 
definite, unlimited period of time; whereas in the clas- 
sics, the sense of aevum, seculum, age, generation (in re- 
spect to time), appears to be its more usual meaning. 

§ 5. Meaning of Aicov. 
Second general class of meanings. 

I come now to a secondary and peculiar use of the 
word in question ; one altogether different from any thing 
in the Greek classics, and derived, as it would seem, en- 
tirely from the Hebrew usage of the word Cbl^, which 
the Seventy have translated so uniformly by alaiv. 

In the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, the word tab 12 
properly means, eternity ; as I shall have occasion by and 
by to shew. Like aloiv also, it is frequently applied to 
designate an indefinite period of time, which is spoken of 
in reference to a great variety of objects, and with shades 
of difference, like those which have been named in regard 
to the use of alobv. But the sense of world, the present 
world and the future world, (when connected with STTrt 
this and tfSJi that which is to come), is one which does 
not appear ever to have been attached to t&fo, by the 
most ancient Hebrew writers ; nor is it found in the He- 
brew Scriptures, unless it be in Ecc. 3: 11, which is so 
doubtful, and so much disputed, that no philological con- 
clusions can be safely deduced from it. 

In the later Hebrew, however, (i. e. the Talmudic 



§ 5. Meaning of Alwv. 27 

and Rabbinic), the word sbi^ is employed, in innumera- 
ble instances, in the sense of world ; and this, either as 
present world, ox future world. From this usage in the 
later Hebrew, (yet not so late but that it preceded the 
time when the New Testament was written), it comes, 
that cclojv, in the New Testament, is not unfrequently 
employed in a similar manner. 

No one, who is at all acquainted with the multitude 
of Hebrew meanings attached to Greek words, both in 
the Septuagint and in the New Testament, will feel any 
surprise at this, or hesitate a moment about admitting the 
possibility or the reality of it. Hence we may assign to 
alcov, another meaning different from any above given, 
viz. 

(4) The meaning, world; also present world, &n& fu- 
ture icorld, when such qualifying words are joined with it, 
as shew that it refers to the one or the other. 

(a) It is sometimes employed to denote the present 
world and future world, with special reference to time or 
duration, i. e. the period of their existence, or of one's 
existence in them. Of this character is the word in ques- 
tion in the following passages ; viz. 

Matt. 12: 32, [the man who has uttered blasphemy 
against the Holy Ghost], shall not be forgiven, neither in 
this world, nor in that which is to come, ovte iv tovtco to* 
atwvi, ovts iv no fxeXlovzo [alojvt] ; i. e. he shall not be 
forgiven during his continuance in the present world, nor 
in that which is to come ; an affirmation plainly added 
by way of intensity, in order to strengthen the declara- 
tion, ova a(f6\)?jG£xai, ccvt(o, forgiveness shall not be ex- 
tended to him, which immediately precedes. 



28 § 5. Meaning of Alwv. 

Mark 10: 30, [the man who has forsaken all that ha 
might follow Christ], shall receive a hundred fold in the 
present time, iv tw xctiQwt xovxw, and eternal life in the 
world to come, iv rw altavt, xco £q%0[i£vo). Here alojv is 
used for ivorld, with special reference to the period of its 
duration ; as is plain from its being placed in antithesis 
with Kenya* xovxco. This might be translated age and 
ranked under No. 3, but with a classical sense like that 
ofEph. 2:7. 

Luke 18: 30, the same words, in the same sense. 

On the whole, all the instances here under a., might 
be rendered in the same classical way, and make a sense 
well fitted for the passages in which they stand. If 
any one prefers this method, I shall not object against 
it. Thus construed, all these texts, with that of Eph. 2: 
7, must be considered as examples of the more common 
classical sense of alwv. 



(b) Aiosv is sometimes employed to denote the world 
with all its cares, or business, or temptations, or allure- 
ments to sin. Just so we often employ it in the English 
language. A man of the world, is a man devoted to the 
cares or pleasures of the world. In a like sense, the later 
Hebrew tk'W was often employed. 

The examples of such a sense are as follows ; viz. 

Matt. 13: 22, the cares of this world, xov cciwvog 
tovtov .... choke the word ; i. e. worldly business, oc- 
cupation, engagements, stifle the impressions which re- 
ligious truth had made. 

Mark 4: 19, the same expression, in the same sense. 

Luke 16: 8, the children of this world, xov aiwvog 
xovxov, are wiser in their generation, etc. 



§ 5. Meaning of Ahov. 29 

Luke 20: 34, the children of this world, tov alojvog 
tovtov, marry, etc. ; i. e. worldly men, men devoted to 
worldly pursuits, etc. 

Rom. 12: 2, be not conformed to this world, rro alwvb 
tovtw' i. e. to the sinful pursuits and pleasures of this 
world. 

1 Cor. 1: 20, where is the disputer of this icorld, rov 
alwvog tovto' i. e. the worldly disputer, one who disputes 
after the manner of men of the world. 

1 Cor. 2: 6, but not the wisdom of this world, tov 
alwvog tovtov, i. e. not the wisdom of worldly men ; nor 
of the princes of this world, tov alwvog tovtov, i. e. of 
worldly-minded princes. 

1 Cor. 2: 8, which none of the princes of this world 
knew, tov alwvog tovtov i. e. which no worldly-minded 
princes knew. 

2 Cor. 4: 4, whom the god of this world, tov cciwvog 
tovtov, hath blinded ; i. e. whom Satan, who reigns in 
worldly men, hath blinded. 

Gal. 1: 4, that he might select us from the present evil 
world, in tov ipsazcoTog aidjvog novriQOv. 

2 Tim. 4: 10, Demas hath forsaken us, having loved 
the present world, tov tvv aiojva. 

Tit. 2: 12, let us live soberly and righteously and 
godly, in the present world, iv rw vvv ahovt* where the 
antithesis shews, that the world of temptation and trial 
is meant. 



(c) From the preceding use of aloiv it comes, that 

the word is sometimes employed simply to denote the 

icorld itself as an object or as an actual existence, i. e. 

simply mundus, ytoopog, and this, either present or fu- 

4 



30 § 5. Meaning of Aiwv. 

ture. Of this ; the following seem to be evident exam- 
ples ; viz. 

Matt. 13: 40, so shall it be in the end of this world, 
iv ty\ Gvvxtlslq, rov aioovog tovtov i. e. w r hen the final 
consummation of all things shall take place, and the world 
comes to an end or is destroyed. 

Matt. 13: 49, the same words, in the same sense. 

Matt. 24: 3, what shall be the sign of thy coming, and 
of the end of the world ? rrjg ovvTilelag rov aicovog, 
which (as the phrase was used here by the disciples) 
seems probably to mean, end of the world in a sense like 
that of the two preceding instances. 

Matt. 28: 20, I am with you always, unto the end of 
the world ; a clear case of the same meaning with the 
preceding words, as rcdoag rag ?]ui^ag, ahvays, plainly 
shews. 

In Matthew 7 , it appears that the usage of at dp al- 
most throughout, (in passages where the reading is not 
doubtful), is in accordance with the later usage of the 
Hebrew in respect to the word &M#- What influence 
this may have on the critical questions, Whether Matthew 
wrote his Gospel in Hebrew ? and of course, Whether 
the present Greek is only a translation ? I cannot stop 
here to inquire ; but critical readers will not fail to note 
the circumstance, to which I have now adverted. 

Luke 20: 35, they who are counted worthy to obtain 
that world, tov atcovog ixetvov viz. the future world, 
in distinction from aidvog tovtov in the preceding 
verse, or in opposition to it. 

1 Cor. 3: 18, if any man thinketh to be wise among 
you in this world, iv zcu atdvi tovto). In the next 
verse, noopog is put for cttdv. This example might per- 
haps be referred to No. 4. b ; and be taken in this sense, 
viz. if any worldly-minded man among you, etc. 



§ 5. Meaning of Amv. 31 

Eph. 1: 21, above every name . ... in this world, and 
in that which is to come, iv tco alojvt tovtq), aXXa %al iv 
tw [aicjvi] [itMovTt. This, some may suppose, might 
be pat under No. 4. a ; but it does not appear that a 
special relation to time is here designated. 

1 Tim. 1: 17, now to the king of the world (worlds), 
royv aiojvarv i. e. the king of the earth, or the king of 
the universe. So in the Old Testament, Ps. 47: 7, God 
is king of all the earth. Zech. 14: 9, the Lord shall be 
king over all the earth ; and so, in innumerable places, 
God is styled king, king of Israel, etc. That the plural 
number (ulo'wow) is here employed, makes no difference 
in the signification; as appears from Heb. 1: 2. 11: 3. 
The same usage is extended to many other words ; e. g. 
*p*££ tabernacle and G'^tsitfiq tabernacles, ^tt God and 
fiVTrtt God, ^ sea and CEP seas, ovoavog heaven and 
ovQavoi heavens, Gapfiazov sabbath and od^para sab- 
baths, etc. ; which, (although I have translated some of 
them in the singular and some in the plural), are indis- 
criminately employed in both numbers, by the sacred 
writers. Aiwvwv then may mean here, as in Heb. 1: 
2. 11: 3, world; or in all these cases it may be render- 
ed worlds, if any one should prefer this. But I am not 
aware that the Hebrews applied the words t&19 and 
alojv, to designate any of the planets except the earth. 
If so, then the plural number here is to be rendered in 
conformity with the usage above intimated ; just as v-^ 
terra and rnsfcnfc* terrae, tk'TJ mundus and TftKk'Wmundi. 
are promiscuously used, not unfrequently in one and the 
same sense. 

The objection to construing alojvojv here as meaning 
ages, is, that the idea of eternity or immortality, (which 
would thus be designated by it), is expressed by the very 



32 §§ 5, 6. Meaning of Amv. 

next word which follows, viz. ucp&uQTO), incorruptible, 
imperishable, immortal. 

1 Tim. 6: 17, charge them that are rich in the pre- 
sent world, Iv tco vvv auovt. Without any violence, this 
might be referred also to the class b, which precedes the 
present head. 

Heb. 1: 2, by whom also he made the world (worlds), 
tovq cciwvag. See on 1 Tim. 1: 17 above, in regard to 
the use of the plural here. 

Heb. 11: 3, by faith we perceive, that the world 
(worlds, xovg aiwvag), was created by the word of God. 
See as above. 

Nearly all of the above instances are very clear and 
striking examples of the purely Hebraistic sense of the 
word aloiv, as sometimes employed by the writers of the 
New Testament. 

To the meanings above specified, I now subjoin one 
which is peculiar, and one, I may add, which is of so 
doubtful a nature, that no philological conclusions can be 
safely deduced from it. 



§ 6. Peculiar meaning of AIojv. 

(5) As "1Y3, in Hebrew, means generation of men, 
considered either as to the time in which they live, or as 
to the persons themselves, so ctlojv, in one case, seems, 
like this word, to have the meaning of generation, i. e. 
race, progeny, a class of men in existence. 

Of this peculiar meaning, the following appears to be 
an example ; viz. 

Eph. 2: 2, in which [trespasses] ye walked, in accor- 
dance with the generation of this world, xccxd xov cclwva 
rov aoofiov xovtow i. e. according to the course pursued 



§ 6. Meaning of Alwv. 33 

by men of this world. The idea is heightened by the 
writer's adding immediately, " According to the prince 
of the dominion of the air ;" i. e. in accordance with the 
designs of Satan, who, being supposed by the Jews to 
dwell in the air, was called the prince of the air. 

One is almost tempted, here, to adopt the translation 
Aeon, an evil spirit presiding over the wicked world, 
and called, in the next clause, the prince of the dominion 
of the air. But the uncertainty whether the Gnostic phi- 
losophy had yet introduced its speculations about Aeons 
(sliwveg) ; and particularly, whether this term, in such 
a sense, was known to any of the writers of the New Tes- 
tament ; seems to forbid such a rendering of aloiva here. 
I cannot help thinking, that it is safer to build on the 
analogy which the Hebrew *n*3 affords, and which makes 
a sense apposite to the subject. 



§ 7. Instances of Alo)v in respect to future punishment. 

(8) Under a distinct head, also, I will now arrange, 
(for the sake of completing my view of alow), the cases 
which have reference to the punishment of the wicked. 

1 do not expect the reader to pronounce judgement 
on this part of the subject here. I have made the pre- 
sent arrangement only for convenience' sake j not design- 
ing either to anticipate a judgement in regard to the 
meaning of cciojp in this connection, or to forestall the 
opinion of the reader. His judgement may be suspend- 
ed, for the present, on this class of texts ; and he may 
regard them here simply as a record of facts, i. e. of ex- 
pressions actually occurring in the New Testament. 

2 Pet. 2: 17, to whom [to transgressors] is reserved 
the blackness of darkness forever, dgatmva. 

4* 



34 § 7. Meaning of Alwv. 

Jude v. 13, for whom [for the wicked] the blackness 
of darkness is reserved forever, elg top aiwva. 

Rev. 14: 11, the smoke of their torment, [the torment 
of those who worship the beast], shall ascend up forever 
and ever, elg alcuvag alojvcov. 

Rev. 19: 3, and the smoke of her, [of Babylon the 
mother of abominations], ascendeth up forever and ever, 
elg rovg aloovag rwv cclwvcov. 

Rev. 20: 10, and they, [the devil, the beast, and the 
false prophet], shall be tormented continually, forever and 
ever, elg rovg aloovag twv alcovcov. 



These are all the instances of alwv which are found 
in the New Testament, where the genuineness of the 
text is unquestionable. All the cases of a questionable 
nature I have purposely omitted. They cannot be built 
upon with safety ; and dispute about the genuineness of 
any particular texts, would be quite foreign to my pre- 
sent design. I therefore omit the instances of aicov, in 
Matt. 6: 13. Rev. 5: 14, which are decidedly rejected by 
Dr. Knapp as spurious ; and also the instances in Acts 
3: 21. Eph. 1: 12. 1 Pet. 1: 23, which are considered 
and marked by him as dubious. 



§ 8. General summary of the meaning of Alwv. 

The result of the preceding investigation, (excepting 
the cases of doubtful readings), is as follows ; viz. 

The whole number of instances in which the word 
alwv is employed, amounts to 95. 

Of these, 16 are used in the ascriptions of praise, glo- 
ry, honour, blessing, etc. to God and Christ ; and in re- 



§ 8. Summary of the meanings of Alwv. 35 

gard to these, there can be no rational doubt that cciwv 
designates a period unlimited or never-ending. 

Equally certain is the same meaning, in the 5 cases in 
which it is applied to God, or to Christ, wJw liveth forever. 
In 4 cases, it is employed in designating the domin- 
ion of Christ ; viz. Luke 1: 33. Heb. 1: 8. Rev. 5: 13, 
and Rev. 11: 15. But the meaning here may be called 
in question. See on Luke 1: 33 above, p. 21. As to 
Rev. 5: 13, I have rendered the word Hydro?, power, 
Hebrew tb ; but as 7# appears in a few cases to mean 
praise, honour, some may insist on that sense being giv- 
en to xgoLTog here. If they should do so, this will not 
alter the meaning of the aicov which follows, because it 
stands connected with the glory given to God, as well as 
to Christ, and therefore, it plainly means a time unlimited. 
The text in Rev. 11: 15, seems to ascribe dominion to 
Christ in the same sense as Luke 1: 33. Heb. 1: 8; and 
it may therefore be questioned by some, whether eternal 
dominion be here meant. 

In one case, 1 Pet. 1: 25, it is said of the word of God, 

that it abideth forever ; which plainly means, that it will 

always be accomplished, or always remain stable, certain. 

In 9 cases, it is applied to the future happiness of the 

saints. 

In 18 cases, it designates the sense of ever, (with a 
negative) never, always, without end, etc. ; and in a great 
majority of these cases, it is applied to something which 
Christ is, or does. 

In 7 cases, it is applied to designate an indefinite pe- 
riod in ages past, ages long ago, very ancient times. 

In 3 cases, it is applied to designate age in the sense 
of dispensation, either Christian or Jewish. But one of 
these is susceptible of another interpretation. 

In 3 cases, it seems to designate the world present or 



36 § 8. Summary of the meanings of Alow. 

future, considered with special reference to a period of 
duration, i. e. with the adsignification of continuance. 

In 12 cases, it designates the ivorld, as the scene or 
place of cares, trials, enticements to sin, etc. 

In 11 cases, it seems to designate, more simply, the 
world present or future, considered merely as a place of 
residence for men, as an object of real existence, etc. 

In one case, Eph. 2: 2, it seems to be equivalent to 
the Hebrew word "-p^ , and to designate the idea of gen- 
eration, homines saeculi hujus, genus hominum. 

In 5 cases, it is applied to the subject of future pun- 
ishment. 

In comparing these cases together, it appears that 
those which have a simple respect to time, i. e. to time 
future, are employed in the sense of unlimited time, inde- 
finite time, ever, always, forever, etc. Of this number 
are 49, besides the five cases which relate to future pun- 
ishment, and the four which relate to the Messiah's king- 
dom. 

Only seven cases of alwv have relation to time past ; 
and these designate either a period from eternity, ox ages 
long ago, very ancient times. 

The four cases which relate to the dominion of 
Christ, may be understood variously, by different inter- 
preters who disagree about his nature or his dominion. 
The passages are noted above. At least, these cases 
must designate a future indefinite period. 

All the other cases of aiciv (of which there are 30), 
may be classed under the general signification of the He- 
brew word Dbte , (as employed in the Talmudic and P^ab- 
binic Hebrew), viz. world in some sense or other, either 
present or future, Jewish or Christian. Of these, there 
are four shades of meaning, viz. world, in reference to 



§ 8. Summary of the meanings of Alow. 37 

the period of time which it comprises, of which there are 
3 cases ; or world, in reference to its cares, pleasures, en- 
ticements, etc., of which there are 12 cases ; or world as 
a place of abode, an existing, real object etc., of which 
there are 11 cases ; or, finally world Jewish or Christian, 
i. e. dispensation, of which there are 3 cases. I leave 
Eph. 2: 2, out of the account here, as the instance is so 
peculiar. 



We come then, by virtue of this examination, to the 
conclusion, that whenever alcav is employed for the pur- 
pose merely of designating future time, as a period of du- 
ration, it designates an indefinite unlimited time in all 
cases ; (those of future punishment being for the present 
excepted). In nearly all, it designates a period in the 
most absolute and extensive sense unlimited ; as in the 49 
cases mentioned above, independently of those which 
have relation to future punishment, and those which re- 
late to the Messiah's kingdom. 

The use of txhov in order to designate past time, is 
seldom in the New Testament, as the above examples 
shew ; there being only seven cases in the whole. Of 
these, six relate clearly to an indefinite, unlimited period 
in ages past, i. e. they signify eternity a parte ante, as the 
elder theological writers were wont to call it. Of this 
tenor most clearly are Acts 15: 18. 1 Cor. 2: 7. Eph. 3: 
9. 3: 11. Col. 1: 26. See above, under signification No. 
2. In one case only, criojv means long ago, in ancient 
times simply, viz. in Luke 1: 80 ; in one case, with the 
negative ova, John 9: 32, it means never. 

We have, then, at least 55 instances in the New Tes- 
tament, in which ulmv certainly means, an unlimited pe- 
riod of duration either future or past, ever, always ; omit- 



38 § 8. Summary of the meanings of Alow. 

ting the cases in which it respects future punishment, and 
those which have regard to the dominion of the Messiah. 
If these be included, we have 64 cases, (out of the whole 
94 which occur), in which ctlcov means unlimited period, 
boundless duration. 

Unless we except Luke 1: 70, (which however can 
hardly be excepted, it being a clear case of employing 
aloiv in a manner designating an indefinite kind of pe- 
riod), there is no case in which cticov is employed in or- 
der to designate simply a definite, limited period, in all 
the New Testament ; I mean, there is no case of this na- 
ture, where aicov is employed with the intention of con- 
veying the simple idea of duration, or time during which 
any thing shall continue to exist or to be done. The New 
Testament writers employ ijfoxla and yevea, to designate 
simply the age or period of men's lives. In no case is 
aiojv employed by them simply in this sense ; or at most, 
we can except only Eph. 2: 7. 

It is clear then, that whenever ahov simply marks 
time in the New Testament, it marks indefinite, unlimit- 
ed time, and such only. In some very few cases, there 
are circumstances accompanying the use of it, which shew 
that eternity, in the absolute and simple sense of the 
word, cannot be intended. But an overwhelming majori- 
ty of cases designate eternity a parte post, (as the techni- 
cal expression is), i. e. a future period without any limits 
or bounds. 

In regard to the other sense of ulmv, (i. e. its mean- 
ing when it is not primarily designed to mark time), it is 
plainly derived, as has been shewn above (p. 420 seq.), 
from the later Hebrew tibis , in the sense of world; and 
it is employed merely to designate this, with the adsigni- 
fications of continuance, or of cares, business, pleasures, 



§9. Meaning of JtuovLog. 39 

etc. ; or else to designate world simply as a place of resi- 
dence, action, etc. ; or world Christian or Jewish. All 
these meanings are obviously foreign to the question 
about future punishment ; with the exception of those, 
however, which speak of the future world, the world to 
come, as the abode of sinners in their state of retribution. 
Of these, more hereafter. 

We are now prepared to advance to the investigation 
of the second word in question, viz. cclajviog. 



MJINIOZ. 

This is plainly a derivate of alow, according to the 
common laws of the Greek language. The question of 
course will now come up, Whether alojvcog the adjective, 
corresponds in meaning throughout with alcov the sub' 
stantive ? 

The classical sense of this word, as given by Passow, 
is long-continued, everlasting, eternal ; all, of course, de- 
signating an indefinite or unlimited period, and agreeing 
with the meaning of aloiv, in all those cases which have 
a simple relation to time. 

The ancient Hebrew has no corresponding adjective 
here ; but it employs the noun D^ny in the place of one, 
as is usual in a multitude of cases with this ancient lan- 
guage. But the later Talmudic and Rabbinic Hebrew 
employs an adjective formed from &bl2 , (just as the 
Greek uiwviog is derived from alojv), in the sense of per- 
petuus, eternus, sempiternus, perpetucd, eternal, everlast- 
ing. The adjective is 'Tobi 2. It is somewhat remarka- 
ble, also, that although only the later Hebrew employs 
the word bbvj in the sense of world, as above described, 



40 § 9. Meaning of Alcoviog. 

yet this same Hebrew, which alone employs the adjective 
^fcb^ , never uses it in the sense of worldly etc., but only 
in the sense of eternal, everlasting. 

We shall see that in this respect, also, the Greek ad- 
jective alow iog corresponds, in the New Testament, al- 
most uniformly with the Hebrew adjective "vabltf ; and 
that all the uses of atoiviog correspond with theirs* class 
of significations which otlciv bears, and not with the He- 
brew-Greek meaning of it. 



We come now to the usage of the word, as exhibited 
in the New Testament. 

§ 10. Meaning of ^frnvcog. 

First general class of meanings. 

( 1 ) It signifies perpetual, never-ending, eternal. 

(a) It is so employed, in regard to the happiness of 
the righteous. 

Matt. 19: 16, what good thing shall I do, that I may 
inherit eternal life, ^coqv cclojviov. 

Matt. 19: 29, whoever shall forsake houses, or breth- 
ren .... for my sake, shall receive .... eternal life, 
Ccorjv ulojviQv. 

Matt. 25: 46, but the righteous [shall go away] into 
everlasting life, Ccof]v aiojviov. 

Mark 10: 17, the same as Matt. 19: 16 above. 

Mark 10: 30, the same as Matt. 19: 29 above. 

Luke 10: 25, like the case in Matt. 19: 16 above. 

Luke 16: 9, that when ye fail [die], ye may be re- 
ceived into eternal mansions, tig rag aicovlovg oxTivag* 
i. e. into eternal abodes of happiness, comp. John 14: 2. 

Luke 18: 18, the same as Matt. 19: 16 above. 



§ 10. Meaning of Aluvioq. 41 

Luke 18: 30, the same as Matt. 19: 29 above. 

John 3: 15, he that believeth on him [Christ], .... 
shall have eternal life, £wriv umviov. 

John 3: 16, that whosoever believeth on him [Christ], 
. . . should have eternal life, fcui/v cciwviov. 

John 3: 36, he who believeth on the Son, hath eter- 
nal life, Ccorjp alwviov. 

John 4: 14, it shall be in him a well of water, spring- 
ing up to eternal life, eig Courjv aiojviov. 

John 4: 36, he shall gather fruit to eternal life, dg £co- 
?;*/ aiojviov. 

John 5: 24, he who believeth on him that sent me, 
hath eternal life, £w>]v alwviov. 

John 5; 39, by them ye think ye have eternal life, £w- 

7]V CtlOJPlOV. 

John 6: 27, labour for the meat which endureth to 
eternal life, elg Cojtjv alojvtov. 

John 6: 40, he who believeth on him [Christ], shall 
have eternal life, Cwqv vdojviov. 

John 6: 47, he who believeth on me [Christ], hath 
eternal life, ^ojrjv alojvtov, 

John 6: 54, he who drinketh my blood hath eternal 
life, ^a)t]v amviov. 

John 6: 68, thou hast the words of eternal life, Corjg 
ccloji'iov. 

John 10: 28, I give eternal life to them, f w??i/ ulwviov. 

John 12: 25, he who hateth his present life, shall pre- 
serve it [his soul] for eternal life, eig £w?;V aiojviov. 

John 12: 50, I know that his commandment is eternal 
life, £ojrj aioivioQ' i. e. the keeping of his commandment 
leads to eternal happiness. 

John 17: 2, that he [Jesus] might give to them [his 
disciples] eternal life, £oj?jv txtwvbov* 
5 



42 § 10. Meaning of Aicovvog. 

John 17: 3, this is eternal life, £co?J aicoviog* 

Acts 13: 46, ye have judged yourselves to be unwor- 
thy of eternal life , £corjg aicovlov. 

Acts 13: 48, and as many believed as were ordained 
to eternal life, eig £coqv aicoviov. 

Rom. 2: 7, to them .... who seek for glory .... 
[God will give] eternal life, Ctorjv aicoviov. 

Rom. 5: 21, so shall grace reign .... unto eternal 
life, eig Ccorjv aicoviov. 

Rom. 6: 22, ye have the end [of obedience], eternal 
life, Cootjv aicoviov. 

Rom. 6: 23, the gift of God is eternal life, £cori aicoviog. 

2 Cor. 4: 17, a far more exceeding and eternal weight 
of glory, aicoviov fiayog doifjg. 

Gal. 6: 8, he who soweth to the spirit, shall of the 
spirit reap life everlasting, £corjv aicoviov. 

2 Thess. 2: 16, God .... who hath loved us and giv- 
en us eternal consolation, aicoviov Tiagdyiltjoiv. 

1 Tim. 1: 16, an example for those who should be- 
lieve in him unto eternal life, eig Ccoqv aicoviov. 

1 Tim. 6: 12, lay hold on eternal life, xrjg aicovlov 
£coijg. 

2 Tim. 2: 10, with eternal glory , ^erddo^g aicoviov. 
Tit. 1: 1, in hope of eternal life, £corjg aicovlov. 

Tit. 3: 7, that we might be heirs, according to the 
hope of eternal life, Ccorjg aicovlov. 

Heb. 5: 9, he became the author of eternal salvation, 
GcoxriQiag aicovlov. 

Heb. 9: 12, he obtained eternal redemption for us, 

UICQVIOV IVTQCOOIV. 

Heb. 9: 15, that they who are chosen might receive 
the eternal inheritance, rrjg aicovlov ^XriQovo^tag. 

1 Pet. 5: 10, God .... who called us unto his eternal 
glory, eig xr\v aicoviov avxov do^av. 



§ 10. Meaning of Alwviog. 43 

2 Pet. 1: 11, an entrance into the eternal kingdom, tig 
Ti]v ccicovwv flccGikelccv. 

1 John 2: 25, he hath promised to us eternal life, fw- 



^ » i 



rjv aiojviov. 

1 John 3: 15, no murderer hath eternal life, few?}*/ 
alcoviov. 

1 John 5: 11, God hath given to us eternal life, fco?;V 
uiwviov. 

1 John 5: 13, those who believe have eternal life, £o>- 
7]v aicoviop. 

1 John 5: 20, the same is the true God and eternal 
life, r t Cojt) aicoviog. 

Jude v. 21, expecting the mercy of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, unto eternal life, eig ^r\v alcoviov. 



(b) The next class of cases are those which have re- 
spect to God or his glory. 

Rom. 16: 26, according to the commandment of the 
eternal God, zov alcovlov &eov. 

1 Tim. 6: 16, to whom [to God] be honour and ever- 
lasting praise, xgarog alcoviov. Here xgdrog^lb . 



(c) There are a few solitary, and miscellaneous cases, 
which I shall arrange under one head. 

2 Cor. 4: 18, the things which are not seen, are eter- 
nal, aiojvia. 

2 Cor. 5: 1, we have a habitation not made with 
hands, eternal, alojvcov, in the heavens. This might be 
arranged under (a) above. 

In Heb. 9: 14, it is applied to the Spirit, (either of 
Christ or of God) ; who by an eternal Spirit offered up 
himself, etc., dice nv£V[iaTog cciojviov. 



41 §§ 10? 11- Meaning of Aiwvioq. 

Heb. 13: 20, the blood of an everlasting covenant, 
dia&?1%f]g aicjviov i. e. of a covenant neve? 9 to be chang- 
ed or abrogated. 

1 John 1: 2, we declare unto you the eternal life, 
Ccof]p amvtov viz. Jesus the author of eternal life. 

Rev. 14: 6, an angel .... having the everlasting gos- 
pel, evayyehov aiaiviov. 

In Philemon v. 15, aloivcov is used adverbially, in the 
sense o{ forever, always. 



§ 11. Second general class of meanings. 

(2) In three cases, the word aioSvioQ seems to bear a 
sense kindred to that of aicov under No. 2 above, viz. an- 
cient, long since, very early, remote. 

The following are the examples of this sort, viz. 

Rom. 16: 25, the revelation of the mystery, which was 
kept in silence in ancient ages, %g6voig aicovloiQ' i. e. 
during all preceding ages, or always hitherto, from eter- 
nity. 

2 Tim. 1: 9, according to his own purpose, and the 
grace given us through Jesus Christ, before the ancient 
ages, TiQO %q6vojv aiwvlojv i. e. before the primitive 
ages, which means, before the world began, from eterni- 
ty. Thus in John 17: 5, the glory which I had with 
thee, before the world was, obviously means, from eterni- 
ty. So our English version, in 2 Tim. L: 9, before the 
world began, n$6 %qovojv aicovlwv, which is also repeat- 
ed in Tit. 1: 2, where the Greek expression is the same 
as here. 

Tit. 1: 2, eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, 
promised before the ancient ages, ngo %qovoiv aicxjvlojv 
evidently in the same sense as the phrase above. 



§ 12. Meaning of Alwviog. 45 

These are all the instances in the New Testament, 
which have relation to past time ; and these, it is very ev- 
ident, have an intimate connection with the use of altav 
in No. 2 above. 

There remain, 

§ 12. Instances in respect to future punishment. 

(3) The instances where uiwviog is used with rela- 
tion to future punishment, are, 

Matt. 18: 8, it is better jbr thee to enter into life lame 
or maimed, than having two hands to be cast into eternal 
fire, eig ro tivq to ocuoviov. 

Matt. 25: 41, depart from me, ye cursed, into ever- 
lasting f re, £13 TO 71 VO TO V.LWVIOV. 

Matt. 25; 46, these shall go away into everlasting pun- 
ishment, eig y.olaoiv aiwviov, [but the righteous into ever- 
lasting life, et3 £o3ijv aiojviov.] 

Mark 3: 29, whoever shall utter blasphemy against 
the Holy Spirit, shall never obtain forgiveness, but be ob- 
noxious to eternal condemnation, aiajpiov zolaeojg. 

2 Thess. 1: 9, who shall be punished with everlasting 
destruction from the presence of the Lord, o?>£&qov cciaj- 

%'IOV, 

Heb. 6: 2, not again imparting elementary instruction 
with respect to repentance . . . and eternal judgement , i. e. 
eternal condemnation or punishment, aioovlov xplosoog. 

Jude v. 6, suffering the punishment of eternal fire , 
ttv po 3 aiwvlov. 

I leave these cases without remark for the present, 
reserving my conclusions until I have made some addi- 
tional remarks. 

5* 



46 §13. Meaning of Alvoviog. 



§ 13. General Summary of the meanings of \Alojviog. 

It appears from the above representation, that there 
are 66 cases in which atojvvog is employed in the New 
Testament. Of these, 51 are used in relation to the 
happiness of the righteous; 2, in relation to God or to his 
glory ; 6 are of a miscellaneous nature, but the meaning 
of aiojviog in them all is quite clear ; and 7 relate to the 
subject of future punishment.' 

In regard to all the cases of v.lojviog, which have a 
relation to future time, it is quite plain and certain, that 
they designate an endless period, an unlimited duration. 
I except of course, for the present, those 7 cases which 
have respect to future punishment. But in regard to the 
rest, if they have not the meaning which has just been 
stated, then the Scriptures do not decide that God is eter- 
nal, nor that the happiness of the righteous is without 
end ; nor that his covenant of grace will always remain ; 
a conclusion which would forever blast the hopes of Chris- 
tians, and shroud in more than midnight darkness all the 
glories of the gospel. 

The above are all the instances in which aiwviog is 
employed in the New Testament ; with the exception of 
1 Tim. 6: 19, where the reading cannot be satisfactorily 
defended. I purposely avoid all readings of this nature, 
in the present investigation. 

In seeking for all the examples of alwv and aiajviog, 
in the New Testament, I have used the Concordance of 
Schmidt, which, having been published before the criti- 
cal investigations of the Greek were made, may nossibly 



§§ 13. 14. Summary of the meanings of Alwvioq. 47 

contain some two or three instances less of these words, 
than are to be found in the Greek text of Dr. Knapp, 
which is the one that I have used. If it should prove to 
be so ; or that I have overlooked some one instance, in 
such a minute and protracted examination ; it will not 
have any effect on the reasoning or state of evidence at 
large, in regard to the subject before us. I trust, more- 
over, that it will not be imputed to any design on my part. 



The reader has now before him, a full view of the 
manner in which the sacred writers of the New Testa- 
ment employ the words alcap and aiojviog. We might 
next proceed, therefore, to draw some conclusion, by com- 
paring the whole together, and in this way shewing in 
what sense the sacred writers probably applied these 
words to the future punishment of the wicked. But I 
must beg the reader to delay a while longer, in order that 
we may obtain a fuller view of facts relating to the usage 
of these same words by the Septuagint translators, and of 
the corresponding Hebrew word tbn#. I shall be as brief 
as possible here ; not considering it necessary to produce 
more than a few citations, as examples in proof of what 
may be stated. The direct evidence I have fully stated ; 
the indirect, I may be indulged the liberty of producing 
in a briefer and more summary way. 



§ 14. Meaning oftkw in the Hebrew of the Old Tes- 
tament. 

This is, (1) Eternity, unlimited duration. 
So Gesenius, in the recent edition (the third) of his 
Hebrew Lexicon, " D?^, eternity ;*' which is the only 



48 §14. Meaning of 'tibl*. 

definition that he gives. He goes on however to say, 
that " the expression in Hebrew, as among us in common 
life, is often used in an inaccurate manner, i. e. when 
merely a very long space of time is denoted. 55 Of this, 
more in the sequel. 

I would remark here, for the sake of brevity, that the 
words in the quotations which follow, that are printed in 
Italic, correspond to the Hebrew word nb^S , in some one 
of its forms. After this explanation I shall not repeat the 
Hebrew word, but only quote the English. 

Gen. 9: 16, that I may remember the everlasting cov- 
enant. 

Gen. 17: 7, I will establish my covenant .... for an 
everlasting covenant. 

Gen. 17: 13, my covenant shall be ... an everlasting 
covenant. The same in Gen. 17: 19. 

Gen. 21: 33, Abraham .... called on the name of 
Jehovah, the everlasting God. 

Deut. 33: 27, the eternal God is thy refuge. 

Ps. 90: 2, from everlasting to everlasting , thou art 
God. 

Ps. 103: 17, the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting 
to everlasting, 

Ps. 112: 6, the righteous shall be in everlasting re- 
membrance. 

Prov. 10: 25, the righteous is an everlasting founda- 
tion. 

Is. 35: 10, the ransomed of the Lord shall return and 
come to Zion, with songs and everlasting joy upon their 
heads. 

Is. 40: 28, the everlasting God. 

Is. 51: 11, the redeemed of the Lord shall return . . . 
and everlasting joy shall be upon their head. 



§ 14. Meaning oftkhs. 49 

Is. 56: 5, I will give them an everlasting name, that 
shall not be cut off. 

Is. 60: 19, Jehovah shall be thine everlasting light. 
The same again in 60: 20. 

Is. 61: 7, everlasting joy shall be to them. 

Is. 63: 12, to make himself an everlasting name. 

Jer. 10: 10, the living God [is] an everlasting king. 

Jer. 31: 3, I have loved thee with an everlasting love. 

Dan. 12: 2, some [shall awake] to everlasting life; 
and some, to shame and everlasting contempt. 

These are only a small proportion of the cases which 
might easily be produced ; but these are enough to shew 
what meaning tk'l$ usually bears, in the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures. 

As a confirmation of this, I will add a few cases where 
the phrase tibiS "l?, tikisb etc. are employed, which cor- 
respond to tig tov aiwvcc, eig aiwva, tig rovg aicovag, 
etc., in the Septuagint and in the New Testament. 

Ex. 14: 13, ye shall see them [the Egyptians], no 
more forever. 

Deut. 12: 28, that it may be well with thee, and thy 
children after thee forever. 

1 Sam. 20: 15, thou shalt not cut off thy kindness 
from my house forever. 

2 Sam. 3: 28, we are guiltless . . . .forever. 
Ps. 89: 4, thy seed will I establish forever. 
Ps. 131: 3, let Israel hope in the Lord forever. 

Ps. 136 exhibits 26 instances, where the same sense 
is certain in them all. 

Under the form t&tej (eig airova) alone, in the sense 
of forever, Taylor in his Hebrew Concordance, has ar- 
ranged some 175 instances. If we add to these, all the 
various forms of dbto , to which the meaning, forever, 



50 § 14. Meaning of tir\$. 

always, time unlimited, or without end, is clearly to be at- 
tributed, several hundreds more must be added to the 
175 cases. It is impossible to doubt, in regard to the 
usual meaning of the word tk'*$ in the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures. But then, 

(2) As Gesenius remarks, t&te is sometimes applied 
(as in common life) to things which endure for a long 
time, for an indefinite period. So it is applied to the 
Jewish priesthood ; to the Mosaic ordinances ; to the pos- 
session of the land of Canaan ; to the hills and moun- 
tains ; to the earth ; to the time of service to be rendered 
by a slave ; and to some other things of a like nature. 
But all the instances of such a nature, taken collectively, 
amount to a very small proportion of the whole, and can 
in no way be looked upon as any thing more than a kind 
of exception to predominant, plain, certain usage. 

In our own language, (where eternal and everlasting 
surely designate a period without end) we often employ 
the same words to designate that ivhich seems to have no 
end, or the end of which is not defined or seen. Thus we 
say, everlasting talker, perpetual scourge, eternal vexa- 
tion, endless trouble, everlasting disquiet, etc. ; all em- 
ployed, in common parlance, for that which endures a 
great while, or for an indefinite period, or which is with- 
out intermission. Yet who supposes, that on this ac- 
count the words everlasting, eternal, perpetual, endless, 
are not, with the strictest propriety, applied to time which 
has no bounds, or in other words, to eternity ? 

Thus much then for the Hebrew word tiYlS , when it 
relates to future time. It is very clear, that when Ge- 
senius defines it Ewigkeit [eternity], he rightly defines 
it. This is its sense, in an overwhelming predominance 



§ 14. Meaning of tfc\y. 51 

of examples. All the meanings derived from this, are 
only exceptions, and amount to mere examples of cata- 
chrestic usage, i. e. usage which is uncommon, or aside 
from the strict sense of the word. Such is the usage in 
all languages, with regard to more or less of important 
words. 

(3) In respect to tk\y , as applied to designate time 
past, it has the same shades of meaning with the Greek 
ciicov, aicivioG, as explained in pp. 24 and 44 seq. This 
usage is not very frequent, when compared with the de- 
signation of time future. Still, there are, in the whole, a 
considerable number of instances ; enough clearly to ex- 
hibit the usus loqnendi in this respect. Any one may 
easily find them, by consulting his Concordance. A 
number of these I will here subjoin, to illustrate the us- 
age in question. 

Is. 63: 9, 11. Job 22: 15. Ps. 143: 3. Prov. 23: 10. 
Is. 42: 14. Mic. 5: 2. Prov. 22: 28. Jer. 18: 15. Ezek. 
36: 2. 26: 20. Ps. 93: 2. 103: 17. 77: 5. 

§ 15. General Summary in regard to &bi# . 

From what has been exhibited in regard to Ebl3> , it 
is plain, that it corresponds throughout with the Greek 
aloiv and aiwvioq of the New Testament, when employ- 
ed in their 'primary sense, viz. as having reference to 
time, either future or past. Of this agreement, we shall 
soon have occasion to take further notice. 

But in regard to the secondary class of meanings 
which vcIojv bears in the New Testament, viz. that of 
world with the various adsignifications noticed above; 
there is no case in the Old Testament Hebrew in which 



52 § 15. Summary of the meanings oftlYlS. 

tijfa bears this sense, if we except Ecc. 3: 11 which is 
too doubtful to build upon. Putting, therefore, this class 
of meanings out of the account, (all of which are dedu- 
ced from the meaning affixed to fcbi^ after the Old Tes- 
tament Scriptures were completed, i. e. by the later He- 
brews), the coincidence between alcov and tib'l$ is very 
striking ; so much so, that nothing can be more evident, 
than that the one corresponds with the other in most ca- 
ses throughout, and that each reflects light upon the other. 
He who thoroughly understands the use of Ebi^ , is bet- 
ter prepared to understand the meanings of alo)V and 
he who has a complete knowledge of the use of aloiv, 
is well qualified to understand the use of tibiy . 

One point only of difference worthy of remark, do I 
find. This is, that it so happens in regard to the use of 
alojp in the New Testament, that it is applied in no case 
to designate simply a period of time which has definite 
limitations ; I mean such limitations as from the nature 
of the case must be regarded as definite, and as known 
to be so. For example ; in the Old Testament fibis is 
applied to the Jewish ordinances, priesthood, and kingly 
succession ; to the hills, mountains, and world ; to the 
possession of the land of Canaan, etc. But in the New 
Testament, no instances of a use so catachrestic as this 
occur. An indefinite, unlimited period, is the basis of all 
the significations of alow and altovioQ there, wherever 
they have a simple reference to time. At most, we can 
only except some few cases, where the reference is to 
past, and not to future time. 

The distinctive trait of usage in the New Testament 
which has now been pointed out, deserves consideration, 
and ought to have its proper weight, in determining the 
signification of the words in question by the usus loquendi 
of the New Testament writers. 



§ 16. Use of aloiv and alojviog. 53 



§ 16. Use of ulo)v and alojviog in the Septuagint, 

If I have counted rightly, atrip, in some of its forms, 
is employed in the Septuagint version of the Old Testa- 
ment 308 times : all as translations of ub'lV , in some one 

r ' 

of its forms. Of these, 184 instances correspond to tibl^b 
in the Hebrew; and 71, to Sbte *!? its equivalent. In 
almost the whole of these instances in which alciv is em- 
ployed, the signification of time unlimited, a period with- 
out end, is, beyond all reasonable question, absolutely 
certain ; just as it is with respect to the Hebrew words, 
to which aiojv corresponds. In the great number of in- 
stances in which ccIojv is employed in the Septuagint, 
some cases occur of its catachrestic use ; precisely in the 
same manner as of the Hebrew word tiblS* , which has 
already been noted above, p. 50. In short, the most un- 
practised observer as to the phenomena of language, can- 
not help remarking that aiojp is, throughout the Old Tes- 
tament, the word corresponding to fcbte , which the Sev- 
enty have almost uniformly appropriated to this purpose. 
Nothing can be clearer, than that they considered it as 
the equivalent of tbis*. So much is this actually the case, 
that I have been able to find only about 20 cases, in the 
whole, where the word aiojv is employed by them, unless 
it be as the translation of tbi^ . Most of these cases, 
also, plainly relate to expressions in Hebrew which are 
equivalent to dbl5 , viz. such as hSjb , 1? , 1? "H? , and 
"isfr . The few other cases which exist, plainly result 
from a reading in the text of the Septuagint translators, 
different from that in our present Hebrew Bibles. 

In regard to a i ojv i o g , I find 92 instances, in which 
the Septuagint has employed it. In six of these, it cor- 
6 



54 §16. Aicov and Alcovioginthe Septuagint. 

responds to other words than tib T2; in all the rest, to 
some form of this word. 

In respect to the meaning of alcovtog, it is perfectly 
obvious that the great body of the cases in which it is em- 
ployed, will admit of no other meaning than that of eter- 
nal, everlasting. But there are a few cases, in which 
the catacJirestic use of it must be admitted. Thus the 
mountains, the Levitical statutes, priesthood, rites, cov- 
enant, also landmarks, waste-places, etc. are called alco- 
viov, precisely in the same manner as tiVlV is sometimes 
applied in the Old Testament, and corresponding through- 
out with it. The word aicoviog, therefore, is, in the Sep- 
tuagint, less strictly applied to indefinite time, an unlimited 
period, than it is in the New Testament. Just the same 
is the case with aicov, as we have already seen. 

I refrain from pursuing my inquiries through the 
Apocryphal books ; from which a great copiousness of 
examples might also be adduced, to confirm the views 
which have already been given of the meaning of aicov 
and alcovtog. It is quite superfluous to pursue the inves- 
tigation any further. We have critical materials enough 
before us to make up a decision, if such materials can 
ever avail for this purpose. 



§ 17. Bearing of the testimony on the subject of future 
punishment. 

We have now surveyed the use of the words aicov and 
alcovtog in the whole latitude of their Scriptural use ; and 
we come, at the close, with all the views before us which 
this investigation and discussion have afforded, to see if 
we can form a satisfactory judgement as to the meaning 



§ 17. Bearing of the testimony, etc, 55 

of the words in question, when applied to designate the 
period of future punishment. 

Let us first lay aside all those various meanings of 
aitov and alcoviog, which cannot have any direct bearing 
on the great question before us. Of this class, plainly, 
are all those in which aioiv has the secondary meaning 
of icorld; some few peculiar ones only excepted, which I 
shall hereafter notice. 

Of the same class, too, are all those meanings of ali&v 
and aicovioQ which have relation to time past. 

It is plain, moreover, that inasmuch as future punish- 
ment must belong to future time, so alow, when connect- 
ed with the designation of such punishment, must, (if the 
laws of universal analogy in philology and exegesis are to 
be observed), have a like meaning with that which it has, 
when applied to other things belonging to a future world, 
and which are yet to take place. 

In all the cases where glory and praise are ascribed 
to GoU forever, ox forever and ever, it will not be credited 
that the sacred writers mean to declare, that this will take 
place for only a definite period of time, or for certain 
ages only. It will not be doubted, that when God is call- 
ed eternal, aiojvioQ ; or when the things of the heavenly 
world are said to be so ; that eternity in the proper sense 
of the word is meant. 

I trust it will not be questioned, in regard to the 9 
cases where aicov is applied to the happiness of the right- 
eous in another world, and the 51 cases where alojviog 
is applied to the same, that a happiness without lim- 
its, without end, is intended to be designated. For all 
these cases, which I shall not repeat here, I must refer 
the reader to pp. 19. 40 above, where he will see them 
produced at full length. 



56 §17. Bearing of the testimony 

Can it be reasonably doubted, then, that the 15 cases 
in which aicov is applied to the future punishment of the 
wicked, and the 7 cases in which aicoviog is applied to 
the same subject, have a meaning like that of the preced- 
ing cases ? The time designated in both is future ; the 
world is future. The intention of the writers seems very 
apparently to have been similar in both cases. The in- 
variable laws of interpretation, therefore, would seem to 
demand a like exegesis. 

Let us for a moment, examine this last position. 

I take it to be a rule of construing all antithetic forms 
of expression, that where you can perceive the force of 
one side of the antithesis, you do of course come to a 
knowledge of the force of the other side. If life eternal 
is promised on one side, and death eternal is threatened 
on the other and opposite one, is it not to be supposed, 
that the word eternal which qualifies death, is a word of 
equal force and import with the word eternal which qual- 
ifies life ? In no other case could a doubt be raised, with 
regard to such a principle. I venture to say that the ex- 
ception here, (if such an one must be made), is without 
any parallel in the just principles of interpretation. 

If then the words aiojv and aicoviog are applied 60 
times (which is the fact) in the New Testament, to desig- 
nate the continuance of the future happiness of the right- 
eous ; and some 12 times to designate the continuance of 
the future misery of the wicked ; by what principles of 
interpreting language does it become possible for us, to 
avoid the conclusion that aicov and aicoviog have the 
same sense in both cases 1 

Will it be said, that we must appeal to arguments here 
deduced from the light of nature, in order to determine 
the probable meaning of aicov and aicoviog, when con- 



on the subject of future punishment. 57 

nected with the future punishment of the wicked ? But 
how can we do this ? The light of nature at best, as we 
have before seen, merely renders it probable in some de- 
gree that the soul may always exist. Does it — can it — 
determine, then, what is to be its condition ; and how 
long this is to continue ? It is impossible. Or if we in- 
sist still on what the light of nature can do, then let us 
go to those who enjoyed it, and see how they decided in 
relation to the question before us. Did not the Greeks 
and Romans hold to the eternity of future punishments ? 
Notoriously they did. And could we, with such light 
merely as they had, couie to an opposite conclusion ? 

But if the declaration of the Scriptures is to be our 
guide, in regard to our creed on this point ; and if we are 
to ask simply what the Bible declares, and not what in 
our view it ought to declare ; then must this great ques- 
tion, like every other one in revealed theology, be ulti- 
mately settled by an appeal to the nature, power, and 
laws of language. Such an appeal I have endeavoured 
to make ; and the result is what I have expressed above. 

It does most plainly and indubitably follow, that if the 
Scriptures have not asserted the endless punishment of 
the wicked, neither have they asserted the endless hap- 
piness of the righteous, nor the endless glory and exis- 
tence of the Godhead. The one is equally certain with 
the other. Both are laid in the same balance. They 
must be tried by the same tests. And if we give up the 
one, we must, in order to be consistent, give up the oth- 
er also. 

But if the eternity of God's glory, attributes, and ex- 
istence, if the eternity of future happiness, are to be given 
up as revealed doctrines ; on what basis are these doctrines 
6* 



58 § 17. Bearing of the testimony 

to be placed? How are we entitled any longer to re- 
ceive them as true, and to hold fast to them as certain ? 

Tell me not of the light of nature here. I must be- 
lieve, (I trust there are very many others who will feel 
constrained with me to believe), that the gospel has 
brought life and immortality to light, and that no mere 
" son of nature" " hath seen God at anytime;" " but 
that the only-begotten, who is in the bosom of the Father, 
he hath revealed him." Believing this — fully believing 
this — I must feel, that the criticism which would decide 
against the endless punishment of the wicked, must also, 
to be consistent, blast my hopes of eternal life, and cover 
the glories of the Godhead with everlasting darkness. 

I feel constrained, moreover, to ask here, If aiciv and 
alojviog do not signify eternity and eternal, in the Greek 
language of the Septuagint and New Testament, then 
what terms has this language to express such an idea 1 
Will any one venture to say, that the sacred writers had 
no such idea as eternity and eternal? If he will, I do 
not think him worthy of refutation. But if it be admit- 
ted that the idea in question was familiar to them, then 
by what terms could they express it in the Greek lan- 
guage, so appropriate as those which have now been ex- 
amined ? 

I admit that a Greek could convey the idea of eterni- 
ty and eternal, in a variety of ways, by different modes 
of expression ; just as we can in English, or as a Hebrew- 
could in his language. It is true, moreover, that the 
New Testament writers, and the Septuagint, have con- 
veyed the ideas in question, occasionally, by the use of 
other words, and by peculiar phrases. But after all, the 
essence of the difficulty remains. The question is sub- 
stantially unanswered by these considerations. It can- 



on the subject of future punishment. 59 

not be shewn, that any words are so appropriate to the 
object named, as the words alojv and aloiviog. 

Still clearer if possible is it, that the proper word in 
Hebrew for eternity, is tlb^ ; to which, in so many hun- 
dred instances, aiciv and aiwviog clearly correspond. 

Must not every philologist and every serious inquirer 
feel, then, that conjecture is out of question, in regard to 
determining such a case as that before us 1 The mean- 
ing of such words is not to be guessed at ; but to be made 
out by analogy, and by a regular and impartial application 
of the laws of language. 

I admit the awful nature of the conclusion, that the 
punishment of a future world is to have no end. I do 
most fully admit, that it is indeed " a fearful thing to fall 
into the hands of the living God." But what if I should 
doubt or deny it ? Can this have any influence on that 
eternal Judge, who will pronounce my final sentence ? 
None. Can my denial of what he has said, or my refusal 
to explain it in analogy with all his other declarations re- 
lative to things of the future world, or my efforts to frit- 
ter away the meaning of his declarations — can all this 
avail me, when I stand an unembodied, naked, helpless 
spirit before his searching eye, and the tribunal of his 
almighty power ? O the dreadful thought ! What if I 
deceive myself, and cry out, " peace I peace V while my 
God saith, " There is no peace to the wicked V 1 Will 
this repeal his law, alter its meaning, or frustrate its pen- 
alty ? It is indeed a fearful hazard, for men to cast 
themselves for safety on such a desperate wreck as this ! 

If there be any relief for the dark prospects of the 
wicked as to the future, it must come only from this 
source, viz. that the Bible has disclosed some method of 
future relief, some encouragement that future reforma- 



60 § 17. Bearing of the testimony , etc. 

tion and penitence will restore the lost favour of God. 
But alas ! where is this to be found ? On this subject of 
unspeakable and everlasting moment, of tremendous in- 
terest, there is not one assertion — one word even — in all 
the book of God, which, when construed by the usual 
laws of language, can afford a gleam of hope. Where is 
another state of probation described ? What are the 
means of grace to be enjoyed in Hell? Is it the preach- 
ing of the gospel ? Is it the influence of the Spirit of 
God ? Who preaches, in the bottomless pit ; or how 
shall the Spirit of God dwell with blasphemers and repro- 
bates ? 

Will misery of itself make men penitent? And this, 
in a world from which the means of grace are excluded ? 
All, all makes against such a supposition. There is not 
a sentence in the Scriptures which asserts it, or even 
gives any countenance to it. All the warnings and ex- 
hortations which the Scriptures contain, go upon the 
ground of men's present state of trial being thew final and 
decisive one. It is impossible to believe rationally, that 
men of such benevolence as were the writers of the holy 
Scriptures, should not have told us something about & fu- 
ture probation and acceptance, if these were known to 
them. If they have not told us of these, then, it is be- 
cause they did not believe in them, they did not know 
any thing of them. And if they did not, how can we 
venture to believe that we have any knowledge of them ? 

On this point, I acknowledge my convictions are 
strong. I have long searched, with anxious solicitude, 
for a text in the Bible which would even seem to favour 
the idea of a future probation. I cannot find it. If oth- 
ers have been more successful in their researches, let 
them shew us the proof of it. When this shall be done, 



§ 18. Results. 61 

in accordance with the simple laws of interpretation, and 
without the application of a priori theology to the Bible, 
then I promise to renounce my feelings and views in re- 
gard to the whole subject before me. 

Until then, I must hold to the endless punishment of 
the wicked, or give up the endless happiness of the right- 
eous. And if the hope of this must be abandoned, then 
may we well ask, what the gospel has revealed that is 
worth our knowing ; or of what value is the existence 
which the Creator has given us ? 

T take it for granted, that all my readers will under- 
stand, that the evidence in respect to future punishment, 
derived from the use of aioiv and v.lwvtog, is only a part 
— a moderate part — of what the Scriptures contain rela- 
tive to this subject. My design, in the present inquiry, 
is not to present at large the subject of future punish- 
ment. To produce all the arguments, and examine all 
the objections, w T ould require a book instead of a short 
essay ; and years of study, instead of a few days. 

§ 18. Results. 

Thus have I endeavoured to present, as briefly as my 
plan would permit, the result of a philological and exe- 
getical examination of the words aiojv and atojpiog, as 
employed by the writers of the New Testament. I may 
have performed a work superfluous for some of my rea- 
ders; who perhaps have elsewhere found what has better 
satisfied their minds, than that which has now been laid 
before them. But if there be any critical and herme- 
neutical essay of this nature, which goes the full length 
of the subject, it is unknown to me ; and I have merely 



62 [§ 19. Altov and Aiwvioq in the Lexicons. 

followed my own plan in the above researches, and made 
all my investigations, without the aid of any lexicons or 
commentators. My reason for this has not been, an aim 
to be original ; much less, a disregard to the opinions of 
others. It has been simply this, viz. a desire not to em- 
barrass my mind with any previous opinions or views. I 
wished to form my conclusion merely from the word of 
God, investigated with diligence and care, and in a man- 
ner as unembarrassed as it was possible for me to adopt, 
in my circumstances. 

The result seems to me to be plain, and philologicaily 
and exegetically certain. It is this ; either the declara- 
tions of the Scriptures do not establish the facts, that 
God and his glory and praise and happiness are endless ; 
nor that the happiness of the righteous in a future world, 
is endless ; or else they establish the fact, that the pun- 
ishment of the wicked is endless. The whole stand or 
fall together. There can, from the very nature of anti- 
thesis, be no room for rational doubt here, in what man- 
ner we should interpret the declarations of the sacred 
writers. We must either admit the ENDLESS mis- 
ery OF HELL, OR GIVE UP THE ENDLESS HAPPINESS OF 
HEAVEN. 

§ 19. Manner in rvhich the words cciojv and aiojvioQ have 
been treated hy some critics and lexicographers. 

As a kind of supplement to the above investigation, 
and for the sake of communicating a fuller view of the 
words in question than most of my readers may readily 
find, I must beg the liberty of adding, by way of Appen- 
dix, a few strictures on the manner in which Lexicogra- 
phers and others have treated alotv and cclojviog. It is 
hio-h time that these words were accurately understood, 



§ 19. Aloiv and Aloiviog in the Lexicons* 63 

and handled in a manner truly philological. If what I 
have said, or may say, will contribute toward the accom- 
plishment of so important an object ; or at least excite 
others to do what needs to be done ; my labour will not 
be in vain. Such of my readers as pursue the critical 
study of the Scriptures, will probably not be uninterested 
in the remarks which follow. Others may omit the read- 
ing of them, should they find them to be destitute of spe- 
cial interest to their own minds. 

In regard to the Lexicons, I shall be brief. I per- 
ceive, on an examination of Schleusner, that my arrange- 
ment differs in some respects from his. I will not delay 
here for the purpose of controverting his arrangement, 
but only to make a few remarks on some parts of it. I 
must leave the rest to the judgement of every reader, who 
will take the pains to examine this author. 

The first meaning which he gives to ctioav, is, a de- 
finite and long time, i. e. a long continued, but still a de- 
finite period of time. Under this head he arranges Matt. 
21: 19, which is the case of the fig-tree that was cursed. 
Now the Saviour is represented by the evangelists as saying, 
* Let there be no more fruit from thee elg xov ulojvu, for- 
ever ;' which surely does not imply, that the time would 
come to an end in which this tree would be barren, or af- 
ter which it would again bear fruit. In other words, de- 
finite time is clearly not marked here. 

Again, he puts John 8: 35 under the same head ; ■ the 
servant does not abide in the house forever ,' ov . . . . e*S 
xov aiojva, but the Son abideth forever, elg xov cclwvcc. 
Can this mean, in either case, a definite period of time ? 

His second head is, life of man, age of man, or time 
during ichich he lives. 

As an example of this, he appeals to Matt. 12: 32 ; 



64 § 19. Aloiv and Alojviog in the Lexicons. 

' They shall not obtain forgiveness, neither in this world, 
iv tovtw too alojvv' which he renders, neither in this life, 
i. e. in this age of man. But on this ground, what does 
aloiv mean in the antithesis, viz., ovis iv too f.ukXovT& 
[alwvi], nor in the life to come ? If a definite period is 
simply meant in the first part of this antithesis, what is 
the definite period of the life to come ? In other words, 
When will it cease ? This incongruity is avoided, when 
the sense of world is given to aloiv in each case. Both 
expressions together then make out an intensive affirma- 
tion, equivalent to never, never. 

Schleusner also appeals to Matt. 28: 20, in confirma- 
tion of the sense which he here gives to aloiv. ■ Lo I am 
with you always even to the end of the world/ eoog rr ( g 
ovvrelalag xov aloovog' (in which however, he has omit- 
ted to insert always, ndoag rag r^itQag). This he con- 
strues as meaning simply, ' I am with you to the end of 
your lives ;' thus making the whole promise attach only 
to the apostles. I cannot persuade myself that this was 
the meaning of Christ, or the only tenor of this promise. 

He then arranges the meaning of aloiv under, (3) 
Men of any age. (4) External things of the 'present life, 
riches, pleasures, etc. (5) Method of living, genius of 
the age, manners of the age. (6) Vicious men of any 
age. After all these, comes the meaning on which the 
whole of them turned, viz. (7) World, universe. He 
comes only in No. 9, to the meaning of eternity, imlimii- 
ed period. 

How incongruous this arrangement is with the mean- 
ing of the word aloiv as used in the 1 New Testament or 
the Old, must be apparent from the preceding exhibitions 
of this word which have been made. How loose and in- 
definite some of the meanings here given are, and how 



§ 19- Aiwv and u4lo)viog in the Lexicons. 65 

far deflected from the original significations of aliiv and 
alonuog, even in the Old Testament ; must be very ap- 
parent even to an unpractised observer. Indeed, it is 
plain that the Hebrew usage of lab 13* , as distinguished 
into the ancient and modern, did not once occur to 
Schleusner, in its proper form ; and of course, he has 
failed to do justice to the corresponding vJojv* 

On the whole, I must consider the article alwv in his 
Lexicon, as one of the unfortunate specimens of im- 
perfect lexicography, which now and then occur in this 
venerable, and (in general) truly valuable writer. 

The Lexicon of Wahl, in regard to this word as well 
as very many others, affords a far better specimen of skill, 
neatness, and accuracy of arrangement. Wahl has ar- 
ranged thus; (1) Time, unlimited duration, aevum. (2) 
The universe, mundus. (3) An age , period of the world ; 
under which he arranges, (a) The present age, i. e. the 
Jewish age or period antecedent to the Messiah. Under 
this head he arranges the following senses, viz. (1) Sim- 
ply, age. (2) Age, with the accessory idea of vitiosity, 
imbecility, etc. (6) The future age, i. e. the reign of the 
Messiah, a period of happiness, liberty, piety, etc. 

This is indeed a great amendment of Schleusner's 
mistaken, unphilological, and (I had almost said) unac- 
countable arrangement. But this exhibits some impor- 
tant mistakes, which, (unless I am greatly in error), are 
adapted to mislead the student of the original Scriptures, 
who places too much confidence in lexicographal guides. 

Under No. 2, he arranges the signification, universe, 
mundus. I had myself, before I gave tklb and cticov an 
extended and minute investigation, been accustomed to 
suppose, that ctiwveg in 1 Tim. 1: 17. Heb. 1:2. 11:3, 
must mean the universe ; particularly, because the plural 
7 



66 § 19. Alo)v and Aloiviog in the Lexicons. 

number is here employed. It was doubtless on the like 
account, that Wahl also gave to alcoveg the same signifi- 
cation. But a minute inquiry into the grounds of such a 
rendering, has convinced me of my own mistake ; and of 
course, that Wahl is also in an error. 

In recurring back to the ancient Hebrew usage of 
fib 19 , I observe that there is no apparent difference be- 
tween the use of the plural number, and the singular, 
in order to designate time. So 1 Kings 8: 13, a settled 
place .... to abide in for ever, tnftbl9 . See also, for 
the like examples, 2 Chron. 6: 2. Ps. T 61: 5 (4). Ps. 77: 
6 (5), where tfttibfa) has the sense of ancient times. Ps. 
145: 13, (everlasting). Is. 26: 4. 45: 17. Dan. 9: 24. 
Is. 51: 9, (ancient). Ecc. 1: 10. (id.) Ps. 77: 8 (for ev- 
er). Is. 45: 17, 19 ^?bl9, ages of perpetuity, for ever 
and ever. 

These instances make it clear, that the plural is used 
in the same sense as the singular, or at least without any 
assignable difference of meaning. If there be any differ- 
ence at all, it must consist merely in this, viz. that the 
plural number is a somewhat more intensive form of ex- 
pression than the singular. But although this is often 
the case in Hebrew, yet in the present case, the nature 
of the several instances where the singular and plural are 
used being compared and well considered, it will be 
plainly seen, that there is no ground for making any as- 
signable difference of meaning between the different 
numbers. 

In just the same way the Seventy have employed 
cclcov. Sometimes they have rendered the plural of ti:l9 , 
by the singular aicov, e. g. Dan. 5: 10, let the king reign 
f*%frgb (Chaldee), eig rov auovcc. So Is. 47: 17, they 
shall not be ashamed 19 *%fc*W 1? , Septuagint ta>g rov 



§ 19. u4io')v and yjlojpcog in the Lexicons. 07 

alwvog txv. In the same verse, t3"»bl5? is translated by 
ulwvtov. In like manner Is. 51: 9, OTgbfS D1"!" is ren- 
dered yeved alolvog. So Ps. 90: 8, WioJjS^ our secret 
[sins], plural number ; but the Seventy, reading it toftb? , 
have rendered it 6 aiciv ijpwv, Ps. 89: 8. By alike mis- 
take in reading, they have again rendered B^M, little 
children, in Job 19: 18, by elg zov alowa, because they 
read it trab 5 )?. 

• T 

On the other hand, the Seventy have used the plural 
of alitiVy in order to translate the singular of some words 
which are equivalent to Dbfa ; e. g. fi'ip in Ps. 55: 20, is 
rendered ngo tcov cciojvcov by the Septuagint, Ps. 54: 19. 

So also the p lured form of tib^S is often used in the 
Hebrew, as equivalent to the singular, i. e. as having the 
same meaning ; e. g. 1 K. 8: 13. 2 Chron. 6: 2. Ps. 61: 
5. 77: 6. Dan. 2: 4 (Chaldee). 3: 9. 6: 22, and so fre- 
quently. 

I have only to add, that a comparison of usage in the 
New Testament, will lead to the same result with regard 
to alojv. 

So far then as it respects the designation of time, the 
singular and plural of alojv answer the same purpose. 
But is this the case, in regard to the use of ccIojv in the 
secondary and later sense of Ebl#, viz. that of world. 
etc.? 

If we go back to Hebrew usage, we shall find no ex- 
ample in it to justify the use of the plural number in the 
sense of worlds ; i.e. in such a sense as astronomy has 
taught us of the present day to employ this plural word. 
In the old Hebrew, yntt means earth; but the plural 
rriS^ft , means lands only in the sense of countries, not 
in the sense of worlds. The other appellation for world 
is b^n , which is employed only in poetry. This has no 
plural. 



68 § 19. Aiwv and Aiiuvwg in the Lexicons. 

When the Hebrew wanted to designate the heavenly 
bodies, he said, host of heaven, S^'^n fcO£ ; or tTllDto, 
stars; or sun, moon, and stars; or tPTatiJ heavens, sim- 
ply. There is no intimation in the Scriptures, as I can 
find, that there is more than one world. 

Hence I must take aiojveg in 1 Tim. 1: 17. Heb. 1: 
2. 11: 3, to mean world simply, i. e. our world, this earth. 
And if it be asked, Whether the Scriptures do not as- 
cribe any thing more than the creation of our world to 
the Son of God? the answer is given in Heb. 1:10, 
' Thou, Lord, didst lay the foundations of the earth, and 
the heavens are the work of thy hands. 5 The same sen- 
timent also may be found in Col. 1: 16. Eph. 3: 9. John 
1: 3, and in other passages. 

That the plural and singular of nouns are often em- 
ployed in the same manner, and to designate one and the 
same thing, no tyro in sacred philology can fail to know. 
For example, in Hebrew ; "jStiJft dwelling, t3 n 3S*?)3 dwell- 
ing ; b$ God, iDVfbtt God; tn sea, fcnjg£ sea; n^h 
wisdom, ni ft Id ft wisdom; *y&^ the upright, t^-vi3? the up- 
right; 2tt5l the wicked, b'WJft the wicked; cirrn the 
abyss, Viiftftn the abyss. So in Hebrew Greek ; aa/3- 
fiazov the sabbath, oafifiaru the same ,* ovoavog the 
heavens, ovoavol the same, etc. 

There is nothing at all peculiar, then, in using aloiveg 
in the same sense as aiwv, or in employing either of them 
indifferently, to designate the idea of world in the singu- 
lar number. 

I should not have said thus much on the error in the 
Lexicons with regard to the plural of this word, had I not 
seen much reasoning about the meaning of ages of ages 
(ctiolvtg aiMvcov), that is built on a supposed distinction 
of meaning between the singular and plural number. 



§ 19. Alt&v and Aiwviog in the Lexicons. (39 

Many writers would seem to ask, ' What can ages of ages 
mean, unless age (aioiv) is a definite, limited period ? Of 
course, must not ages of ages, after all, be only a series 
of limited periods, and finally have a termination ?' 

The answer to this is not difficult. In regard to the 
plural number utowtg, it imports of itself no more than 
the singular. In regard to the form of expression ages of 
ages, or age of ages, or age of age, (for all these are in- 
differently employed), it is a mere intensive form of ex- 
pression, and nothing more nor less. What are servant 
of servants, lord of lords, holy of holies, heaven of heavens, 
etc., but intensive forms of expression ? And if any one 
should ask, Whether any thing can be added to the idea 
of eternity, of unlimited duration ? in order to shew that 
there is an incongruity in employing aiojv, in the ex- 
pressions now before us, with an unlimited sense ; I 
would reply by asking, Whether forever in English does 
not mean eternity, unlimited duration ? If so, then how 
can we add to it ? Yet we do say, forever and ever ; 
that is, we do use an intensive expression, in order to de- 
signate with emphasis the idea of a never-ending period of 
time. Could not the Hebrew, then, say Tyi E&fob ; and 
the Greek, tig rovg ahovag tojv aiojvojv,in the very same 
sense, and for the very same purpose, as we say forever 
and ever ? 

He could ; he did : and all criticisms on these phra- 
ses, which would deduce any thing more from them than 
intensiveness of expression, is built on an imaginary basis, 
not on one which has its support in the usus loquendi of 
either the Greek, Hebrew, or English language. 

There is another mistake, (as it seems to me), in 
Ward's article on aioiv. He has, throughout, made pre- 
sent world etc., and world to come etc., mean, the age 



70 § 19. Aidv and Alwviog in the Lexicons. 

preceding the Messiah, and the age after his advent. In 
doing this, he has appealed to the Jewish usage of this 
world, and the world to come. Fit Si th\$ and *on &£l& 
But this appeal is very far from sustaining him. The 
Rabbinical Jews divided this world into the lower world, 
i. e. the proper earth with all that it contains ; the middle 
world, i. e. the region of the air, including the heavenly 
bodies ; and the supreme or upper world, i. e. the world of 
angels, etc. 

In regard to world to come ox future world, some held 
it to be the new world, which would arise after the de- 
struction of the present ; others, (and this I take to be 
the general usage), held it to be the world of souls, i. e. 
the future world in the same sense in which we now use 
this phrase in English ; some only, (Buxtorf merely says 
quidam), regarded it as meaning the days or age of the 
Messiah. Could any one justly expect such a train of 
deduction from this, as appears in the Lexicon of Wahl ? 

Of all the numerous cases, which he arranges under 
the head of age before and after the Messiah, not more 
than three will stand the test of investigation ; viz. 1 Cor. 
10: 11. Eph. 2: 7. Heb. 6: 5. Of these, Eph. 2: 7 is by 
no means necessarily arranged under the head in ques- 
tion, as it may easily be understood simply of ages to come, 
and more probably should be so understood. 

As to the other cases, where the present alwv and the 
uioiv to come, are expressed or implied, I take nothing to 
be more certain, than that the arrangement of Wahl is 
fundamentally erroneous. It is not only without any ba- 
sis in predominant Jewish usage ; but it would force on 
the text of the New Testament a sense strange enough 
in some cases, and unnecessary in all. 

When our Saviour, in the parable of the sower, says, 



§ 19. Aldv and Aid) v tog in the Lexicons. 71 

* The cares of this world; 1 is there any special relation 
here to the age which preceded the Messiah ? Was there 
then to be no toorld in the sense here plainly meant, af- 
ter the Messiah had come ? Rather, does not the whole 
parable represent all the occurrencies to which it alludes, 
as taking place under the gospel-dispensation ? Yet this 
world, if we may credit Wahl, was now no more, inas- 
much as the tcorld to come had already begun. 

Let any one now examine Mark 4: 19. Luke 20: 34. 
Rom. 12: 2. 1 Cor. 1: 20. 2: 6. 2: 8. 2 Cor. 4: 4. Gal. 
1: 4. 2 Tim. 4: 10. Tit. 2: 12. Matt. 13:40, 49. 28: 20, 
and see what these texts can possibly have to do exclu- 
sively with the age that preceded the Messiah. And yet, 
if Wahl be in the right, they all fall under this class, 
having a relation more or less distinct to such an age. 

How easy to be misled, when we fall upon theory that 
looks attractive ! Wahl fell upon the above theory, in 
Bertholdt's Christologia Judaeorum etc. p. 38 seq., and 
thought it would solve many apparent difficulties about 
uldiv in the New Testrment. But the theory itself, like 
many other things in that undigested and hasty book, 
needs much more confirmation than has been given to it, 
before it can be so extensively applied as Wahl has ap- 
plied it. 

The remarks which I have just made, on the mean- 
ing assigned by Wahl to present and future cclciv, will 
apply, in all respects, to the article on this same word in 
the Lexicon of Bretschneider ; who, under the same 
guide (Bertholdt), has fallen into the same errors. 

Had he and Wahl simply read, with attention, the 
article tbvj in Buxtorf's immortal Hebrew, Rabbinic, 
and Chaldaic Lexicon, they might have avoided such a 
mistake. This Coryphaeus of all Rabbinical investiga- 



72 § 19. Does alwvtog mean spiritual? 

tors, has given no occasion that any attentive and intel- 
ligent reader should be misled. 

But it is time to retreat from the examination of Lex- 
icons. Enough has been said, I trust, to put the student 
on his guard against implicitly following the authority of 
dictionaries ; especially in respect to an important article 
like the present, and when the whole of the evidence is 
not laid before him. 



I must beg leave, in closing, to make a few remarks 
on a singular criticism upon the word alojviog, which I 
have recently met with in one of the Journals of the day. 

The writer proposes to render alojpiog, spiritual. 
His reason is, that Aeons (^iojveg) were counted as in- 
corporeal, i. e. spiritual, beings ; and therefore aiwviog, 
may mean Aeonic, i. e. spiritual. In accordance with 
this, he construes the various passages which exhibit 
aiaiviog, and which have a relation to future punishment. 

This criticism has, at least, the merit of novelty. At 
all events it is novel to me, inasmuch as I never met 
with it in any writer before ; nor did it once ever occur 
to my mind, as a probable or possible meaning of aiojviog. 
But then, the author of it might very justly say ; ' This is 
no good argument against the probability of the criticism ; 
much less against the possibility of it ; and a better 
ground than this may very properly be demanded, for re- 
jecting it.' 

I cannot deny the reasonableness of this ; and I there- 
fore, out of respect to one who appears to be seriously in- 
quiring after Scriptural truth, would suggest the follow- 
ing grounds, why I must reject the exegesis which he 
has proffered. 

1 . The question remains to be settled, whether the 



§ 19. Does aiojviog mean spiritual? 73 

Gnostic system, (the one from which the imagination of 
Aeons sprung), had an existence, or at any rate, was 
known in the western parts of Asia, before the propaga- 
tion of the gospel, or even at that period. Whoever has 
read Tittmann, de Vestigiis Gnosticorum in Nov. Test, 
frustra quaesitis, will have vehement doubts, as I must 
think, in regard to the point in question ; more vehement 
still, whether the New Testament exhibits any certain 
marks, that the writers of it had an acquaintance with the 
Aeonic system. 

The Aeons were, (if we may credit the statement of 
the Gnostics who believed in their existence), beings of 
both good and bad characters, i. e. there were some of 
each, belonging to the different classes. They were re- 
garded as secondary or derived divinities, fteol devzeQOt. 
There were spiritual beings above them, and below them. 
Why then should Aeonic, be chosen to designate spiritual, 
any more than an adjective borrowed from the name of 
the God above them, or the sub-divinities below them ? 

But how dubious, too, must such an adjective be ! 
The majority of the Aeons were apostate ones. Aeonic, 
then, would be about the same as diabolic, in regard to 
its meaning. Suppose now, I should assert, that diabolic 
means spiritual, because the devil is a spiritual being ; 
would this be a well-chosen epithet to supply the place 
of spiritual ? Can it be probable, then, that Aeonic pun- 
ishment and Aeonic life, are used by the New Testament 
writers to denote spiritual punishment and spiritual hap- 
piness ? If it could be shewn, (which it cannot be), that 
the New Testament writers had an acquaintance with 
the system of the Gnostics ; it must still appear very im- 
probable that they would coin such an unfortunate ad- 
jective as Aeonic, But until we are better ascertained 



74 § 19. Does alwvcog mean spiritual ? 

whether they knew any thing about Aeons, we can nev- 
er be entitled to give such an exegesis to their writings. 

2. But there is another conclusive argument against 
the interpretation in question. This is, that the exegesis 
proposed would make spiritual misery or happiness to 
begin only after the general judgement. Matt. 25: 31 
— 46 represents, (as the critic in question concedes), the 
judgement of the future world. Is it then true, that spir- 
itual happiness commences with the righteous only after 
that period ; or that spiritual misery then first begins 
with the wicked ? Neither the one nor the other ; and 
consequently I cannot admit the exegesis, which, without 
any support at all from philology, would force me to such 
a conclusion. 

3. But if the meaning spiritual, is to be given to 
aiofviog, as a general one in the New Testament, then 
cases would arise of the most revolting nature, in regard 
to the application of it. For example ; 1 Tim. 6: 16, [to 
God] be KQuxog cctojviov. Shall we render, spiritual 
power ? 

Heb. 9: 14, who [Christ] by an eternal Spirit, Sect 
nvevjuarog atojvlov, offered up himself, etc. Shall we 
say, by a spiritual Spirit ? 

Philemon, v. 15, for he (Onesimus) was absent a lit- 
tle while, that thou mightest have him aiorviov — spirit- 
ually ? 

Rom. 16: 25, the revelation of the mystery, which 
was kept in silence %QOvocg alcovloig'—in the spiritual 
ages 1 

2 Tim. 1: 9, the grace given us ... . ngo %qqv(ov 
alcovlcuv — before the spiritual ages ? 

But I have pursued this illustration far enough. I 
know not how to think that the writer on whom I am an- 



§ 19. Does aioivioQ mean spiritual? 75 

imadverting, can seriously persuade himself that he has 
made out a philological argument in favour of his posi- 
tion. If not, then why should he venture to urge such a 
position on his readers ? when in his own conscience he 
must know, that grounds of reasoning a priori have in- 
clined him to embrace the doctrine which rejects the 
eternity of future punishment ; and not the language of 
the Bible. Let him shew that a day of grace, a preach- 
ed gospel, an offered Mediator, a sanctifying Spirit, and 
pardoning mercy, are proclaimed in the Scriptures as 
proffered to sinners in another world, who have rejected 
them all in this ; and then we may lend him a listening 
ear. Until then, we must believe that " the unjust will 
be unjust still ; and the filthy, filthy still." 



^INtD 



§ 1. Usual meaning of the word. 

The word "bi^UJ has, not unfrequently, been derived 
by lexicographers and critics, from the root ^fitsj , to ask, 
crave i demand, require, seek for, etc. Now inasmuch as 
the grave may be figuratively said to be rapacious or 
craving, it has been supposed that the name in question 
was therefore given to the grave or under-world; and that 
*blittU5 means, in Hebrew, what Orcus rapax does in La- 
tin, or the same as insatiable sepulchre does in English. 

This etymology, however, is too uncertain, to be en- 
titled to much confidence. Nor is the origin of the word 
in question, in any good degree illustrated by any of the 
languages kindred with the Hebrew. Of these, the Sy- 
riac and Ethiopic only exhibit the word ; but not in such 
a manner as to cast any important light on its etymology. 
We are left, therefore, merely to the manner in which the 
Hebrews employed the word, in order to determine its 
meaning. The examples of it, in the Hebrew Scriptures 
are somewhat numerous ; still as an investigation of its 
real import must be a matter of deep interest to every se- 
rious inquirer, it seems necessary to bring the whole of 
them into view. 



§ i. Meaning of\f\$$. 77 

I observe, by way of introduction to the view of them 
which is now to be given, that I have simply followed, 
as my custom is, the Concordance, and endeavoured, in 
each case, to determine the meaning of the word M-fcWJ, 
from the connexion in which it stands. 

The arrangement with regard to the respective mean- 
ings of the word in question, which I have thought to be 
the most plain and lucid, is as follows ; viz. 

I. The more obvious or literal sense of sheol. 

This is, the under-world, the region of the dead, the 
grave, the sepulchre, the region of ghosts or departed spir- 
its. 

This meaning is general, i. e. the signification of the 
word Jfttfti is generic. In other words, it sometimes sig- 
nifies the region of the dead, to which the righteous and 
the wicked both go ; as does adrjg, the invisible world, 
in classic Greek authors. But as every generic word is 
capable also of a specif c meaning, whan circumstances 
require it; so, we shall see in the sequel, Sheol may be 
regarded sometimes as the place to which good men go 
after their death, and sometimes as the place to which 
evil men go ; i. e. the word itself means, the region of the 
dead in general, and it is made particular, only by cir- 
cumstances connected with it. 

I proceed to detail the examples. 

Gen. 37: 35, and [Jacob] said, I will go down into 
the grave, tibltfti , unto my son, mourning ; i. e. Jacob 
declares that he shall be brought down to the grave by 
mourning, and thus be united wih Joseph his son, whom 
he believed to have been destroyed by wild beasts. It 
is not to be supposed, that Jacob believed Joseph to have 
gone to the world of wo, to hell in the common sense of 
8 



78 § 1. Meaning of "bl&NB. 

this word as it is now used by us ; nor that he himself ex- 
pected to go thither. Indeed, it is impossible to mistake 
the obvious meaning of Sheol here, which is simply grave 
or region of the dead. 

Gen. 42: 38, [Jacob says], ye shall bring down my 
gray hairs with sorrow to Sheol, 1 m fc' m \&'ti ; i. e. simply to 
the grave, as before. 

Gen. 44: 29, [Jacob says], ye shall bring down my 
gray hairs with sorrow to the grave, irfr&ip ; the same as 
above. 

Gen. 44: 31, [Judah says to Joseph, when pleading 
for the liberation of his brother Benjamin], We shall 
bring down the gray hairs of thy servant, our father, with 
sorrow to the grave, ttMfctfB ; in the same sense as above. 

Num. 16: 30, [Moses says of Korah and his compa- 
ny], If . . . . the earth open her mouth, and swallow them 
up ... . and they go down alive into Sheol, Tfeixti ; i. e. 
if they go down alive into the under-world, into the region 
of the dead. That Korah and his company went to the 
world of wo, there can indeed be but little if any reason 
to doubt, considering their character and the nature of 
their crime. But the words of Moses in this place, seem 
to refer primarily to the event which was about to take 
place, viz. to Korah and his adherents being swallowed 
up alive, and thus going down into the under-world. 

Num. 16: 33, they [i.e. Korah and his company] 
went down alive into Sheol, inbJS'iJ; i. e. they went down 
alive into the under-world, the region of the dead. 

In the two last cited passages, our English version has 
pit, as the translation of Sheol. The sense of pit is grave, 
deep cavity or recess in the earth. The sense of hell, 
given to the word pit by occasional usage, is figurative or 
secondary, and not the literal or primary meaning of it. 



§4. Meaning of y-]^. 79 

Deut. 32: 22, for a fire is kindled in mine anger, and 
it shall barn to the lowest Sheol, rpftftn bi&p I i. e. it 
shall burn down into the very under-world. So the paral- 
lelism in the sequel leads us to interpret this ; which runs 
thus, " It shall set on fire the foundations of the moun- 
tains." The image is a tremendous one, viz. that of a 
fire so intense and dreadful, as not only to consume all 
that is on the surface of the ground, but to burn deep 
down into the under-world. 

1 Sam. 2: 6. The Lord killeth, and maketh alive ; he 
bringeth down to Sheol, blttU? , and bringeth up ; i. e. he 
bringeth down to the grave or region of the dead, and 
bringeth or raiseth up from the same. That such is the 
meaning of this passage, seems plain from the first part 
of the verse, in which it is said, The Lord killeth and 
maketh alive ; the equivalent of which is, The Lord bring- 
eth down to Sheol, and raiseth up from it. If by Sheol 
here, hell, (in its appropriate sense), be meant ; then how 
shall the last clause be construed, viz. The Lord bringeth 
up from Sheol ? Is it then a Scripture doctrine, that the 
Lord brings up from the "eternal pit/ 5 those who are 
once confined there ? Or rather, do not the Scriptures 
teach that " the smoke of their torment ascendeth up 
forever and ever ?" 

2 Sam. 22: 6, the snares of Sheol, bitttiJ , encompas- 
sed me ; the deadly nets came upon me. Our English 
version renders thus ; " The sorrows of hell compassed 
me about ; the snares of death prevented me," i. e. came 
before me ; for this is the sense in which the word prc- 
vent is employed, in our version, and not in the sense of 
hinder, which would here misrepresent the Hebrew. 
This version evidently sacrifices the parallelism of the 
original Hebrew ; in which blSN? "'rnfr , the snares of 



80 § 1. Meaning of y^p. 

Sheol, and rHtt ^fjlfc j the nets or snares of death, are 
equivalents. It seems to sacrifice propriety also ; for in 
what tolerable sense could David say, that the sorrows of 
hell (in our present sense of this word) encompased him? 
But when, in describing a scene of the highest danger, 
he is represented as saying, figuratively, * The snares of 
Sheol encompassed me, i. e. such fatal snares as take hold 
of their victim with deadly force, or subject him to death ; 
such snares as bring their victim down to the region of 
the dead ; then all is plain and proper. Then too, the 
parallelism with the second part of the same verse is re- 
tained ; which is, " The snares of death came upon me." 
On the whole, the case is so plain, that no rational doubt 
can be entertained, by any one versed in the original lan- 
guages of the Bible, with regard to its real meaning. 
Comp. Ps. 18: 5 (6). 

1 K. 2: 6, [David, charging Solomon to punish Joab 
for the murders he had committed, says], Thou shalt not 
let his hoary head go down to Sheol, b&tt$ , in peace ; i. e. 
thou shalt not let him die a natural death, but shalt pun- 
ish him, or put him to a violent death. So our transla- 
tors ; who have here translated bfc'# by the word grave, 
thus shewing how they understood the passage. 

1 K. 2: 9, [David, charging Solomon to punish Shim- 
ei, says], Thou shalt bring down his hoary head to Sheol 
with blood ; i. e. thou shalt cause him to suffer a violent 
death, and not leave him to die a natural one. The pas- 
sage is of the same nature as that above ; and }?ltr<p is 
also rendered grave here, by our English translators. 
The meaning of Sheol, in both cases, may be expressed 
by grave, or region of the dead, under-world. 

Job 7:' 9, As a cloud is consumed and vanisheth 
^way ; so he that goeth down to Sheol, shall come up no 



§ I. Meaning of Y^ti. SI 

more ; J. e. he that goeth down to the grave, to the region 
of the dead, shall no more return to the present world — 
never rise up again to mix with the living here. So our 
translators understood the word Sheol here, inasmuch as 
they have rendered it, grave. 

Job 11: 8, It is as high as heaven, what canst thou 
do ? Deeper than Sheol, Iblttttift , what canst thou know ? 
i. e. deeper than the under-world, the abyss, the world 
beneath ; for the antithesis of heaven, i. e. the natural 
heaven, lofty, elevated beyond admeasurement, is plainly 
intended here ; and this antithesis can be none other than 
the abyss beneath, the under-world, Hades. Our ver- 
sion, which here renders hell, has obscured the exact 
meaning of the passage. 

Job 14: 13, O that thou would hide me in Sheol, M&2J3 ; 
i. e. in the grave, or (in other words) O that I might die ! 

This is one of those cases, about which there can be 
no possible doubt. Job might, as thousands of others 
have done, wish for death, in a time when deep dis- 
tress and despondency had come upon him ; but surely 
Job did not wish to be placed in the world of wo, in hell. 
Accordingly, our translators have here rendered Sheol 
by grave. 

Job 17: 13, If I wait, Sheol is my house ; i.e. let me 
die speedily, for if I should continue ever so long in life, 
I must die at last, or go down to the grave. So our 
translators , " The grave is mine house." 

Job 17: 16, They shall go down to the bars of Sheol, 
when our rest together is in the dust ; i. e. they shall go 
down into the grave, together shall we rest in the dust, 
viz. in the grave or sepulchre. Here our translation has 
pit ; which (if it mean grave as I suppose it does) is cor- 
rect as to the idea conveyed by the passage. The place 
S* 



82 § 1. Meaning of ywti. 

of future punishment cannot be meant here ; for surely 
Job did not expect to go to such a place ; nor were cor- 
ruption and the worm, (which, as he here avers, were to 
c rest together with him in the dust ; ), to go with him to 
a place of future punishment. 

Job 24: 19, drought and heat consume the snow wa- 
ters; so doth the grave, bl&'J?, those who have sinned. 
So our Version ; and rightly, for the consumption of the 
body in the grave, is clearly the idea here, which the wri- 
ter designs to express. 

Job 26: 6, Sheol, bl&p , is naked before him, and de- 
struction, JTtflK , hath no covering ; i. e. the under-world, 
the world beneath, is open to his all-seeing eye, yea, the 
place of destruction, viz. the grave, hath no covering. 
The idea here is plainly of this nature ; for the object of 
the writer is, to place in a striking point of view, the om- 
niscience of God. In order to do this, he represents him 
as extending his view to the dark world beneath, as well 
as to all parts of the earth that lie exposed to the light of 
day. But our translators have here rendered Sheol by 
the word hell ; for which I am not able to see any good 
reason. 

Ps. 6: 5 (6), For in death there is no remembrance 
of thee; in Sheol, pi ttttis , who shall give thee thanks? 
i. e. in the world of the dead, who shall present thank of- 
ferings for deliverance from danger ? How can offerings 
of this nature be made, when fatal evils have overtaken 
me 1 The first member of the verse, ' In death there is 
no remembrance of thee, 5 shews the meaning of the se- 
cond member ; and of course the meaning of Sheol, which 
may be rendered, sepulchre, under-world, or, as our Ver- 
sion has it, grave. 

It will be remembered, that the Psalmist is here 



§ 1. Meaning ofYi^ . 83 

speaking of his own danger, and praying for deliverance. 
Can it be well supposed that he means to express the 
idea, that if cut off he should go to the world of woe, to 
hell, where no praise could be given to God ? 

Ps. 16: 10, Thou wilt not leave my soul [me] in 
Sheol, blNBft ; neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to 
see corruption ; i. e. thou wilt not leave me in the grave, 
nor suffer thy consecrated Messiah to consume, or to be 
turned to corruption there. In other words, thou wilt 
raise me from the dead, before the grave exercises the 
power of corruption over me. So Peter construes this 
passage, in Acts 2: 24 — 32, applying it simply to the re- 
surrection of Christ from the grave. Indeed, no evidence 
is needed besides the nature of the parallelism in the 
verse, inasmuch as the latter member explains the for- 
mer. We might ask, also, can the soul of Jesus be sup- 
posed to have been in the world of woe, the place of the 
damned? I know, indeed, that there are some, who de- 
duce from this passage the doctrine of a purgatory , into 
which Christ descended, in order to preach to " the spir- 
its who are in prison." But there is no foundation in this 
text, for any such deduction. 

Ps. 18: 5 (6), The cords of Sheol, JrtMJ , encompas- 
sed me ; the snares of death came upon me ; i. e. the 
deadly cords encompassed me, See on 2 Sam. 22: 6 
above. The English Version here [hell) has plainly 
failed to give the appropriate meaning ; i. e. this is so, 
provided the word hell be understood as meaning the 
world of \coe, 

Ps. 30: 3 (4), Thou hast brought up my soul from 
Sheol, Vwti \J2 ; i. e. thou hast kept me alive, amidst 
great dangers, so that I did not go down to the pit. Here 
our version has grave; for, indeed, any other version 



84 § 1. Meaning of y-)&V . 

would have been an evident departure from the meaning 
of the writer ; who surely does not mean to say, in 
this place, that he had been brought up from the world 
of woe. He is celebrating the goodness of God in " pre- 
serving him alive, and keeping him from going down to 
the pit." 

Ps. 31: 17 (18), let the wicked be ashamed, and let 
them be silent in Sheol, Yi^b ; i. e. let them be cut off, 
or let them be punished with the loss of life. If we con- 
strue Sheol here as meaning the world of future misery, 
it would represent the Psalmist as praying that the wick- 
ed might be sent to that world ; an example of which can 
hardly be found, I believe, in the Scriptures ; nor is it 
easy for a benevolent mind well to conceive, how a good 
man could pray directly for such an object as this. On 
the other hand, if Sheol be rendered grave here, as it is 
in our English Version, then we may conceive it altogeth- 
er possible, that a good man, a magistrate and a king, 
whose duty it was to cut off certain transgressors, might 
express a wish that the justice due to them in a civil re- 
spect, might be executed. 

Ps. 49: 14 (15), Like sheep they [the wicked] are 
laid in Sheol, Yi$p\ .... their beauty shall consume in 
Sheol, or be for the consuming of Sheol, ^tt-23 rriV^v 
Here, that they are laid in Sheol like sheep, is a circum- 
stance which points to the grave, and not primarily to the 
world of woe ; and so the last part of the verse also indi- 
cates, by the consuming of Sheol, viz. the consumption or 
corruption of the flesh in the grave. So, also, our Eng- 
lish translators understood the passage, having rendered 
Sheol by the word grave, in both cases. 

Ps. 49: 15 (16), But God will redeem my soul [me] 
from the power of Sheol, bltttt? T£ , i. e. from Sheol. In 



§ 1. Meaning of V^ti. 85 

other words, God will preserve me from the grave ; he 
will keep me from perishing like the wicked. Whether, 
under this imagery, more than a literal meaning is not 
here conveyed, as also in the example above, will be a 
matter of inquiry in the sequel. 

Ps. 55: 15 (16), Let death seize upon them ; let them 
go down alive into Sheol, E^r] blSFSJ ^T*);; i. e. let the 
grave or the under-world swallow them up alive. In oth- 
er words, Let them be speedily and in a fearful manner 
punished, or cut off. In respect to the sentiment, I 
would refer the reader to what is said on Ps. 31: 17 above. 
There is a serious difficulty in the way of supposing the 
Psalmist to have prayed, that his enemies should go down 
suddenly to the world of future woe. Here, however, our 
English Version renders Slieol by hell ; but why this 
should be done here, and not in Ps. 31: 17, it would be 
difficult to say. 

Ps. 86: 13, great is thy mercy toward me ; and thou 
hast delivered my soul [me] from the lowest Sheol, b'l&tift 
rpft'TO . At first view, it would seem as if the Psalmist 
were here speaking of spiritual deliverance from hell, or 
the world of future misery, and thanking God, that by his 
mercy he had provided a way of escape from it. But the 
next verse seems plainly to indicate, that deliverance 
from temporal death is here meant. It runs thus ; "O 
God ! the proud are risen up against me ; and the assem- 
blies of violent men have sought after my soul [my life], 
and have not set thee before them." The word £$£>3, 
which our translators have here rendered soul, is a 
common Hebrew word for life, and is very often so ren- 
dered. It clearly has that meaning here ; for soul, in 
any other sense than this, David's enemies surely did not 
seek after. Consequently, we must conclude, that the 



86 § 1. Meaning of yitrti. 

deliverance commemorated in v. 13, is a deliverance 
from the grave, or under-world, i. e. from death. By say- 
ing lowest grave or sepulchre, the writer designates a 
most terrible and cruel death, or a death of the most 
shocking nature. 

Ps. 88: 4, My soul is full of trouble ; my life draweth 
near to Sheol, bltoVfe ; i. e. to the grave, as our English 
Version has expressed it. The context clearly shews 
this ; in which the writer goes on to say, that he is " like 
the slain that lie in the grave ;" and asks whether God 
will " shew wonders to the dead, etc." He says also, 
" Thou hast laid me in the lowest pit ;" which will illus- 
trate lowest Sheol in Ps. 86: 13. 

Ps. 89: 48 (49), What man is he that liveth and shall 
not see death ? Shall he deliver his soul [life] from the 
hand of Sheol ? J?YK25 ; i. e. from the power of the grave. 
So our Version, " from the hand of the grave. 3 ' The first 
clause of the verse makes the sense of grave, in the lat- 
ter clause, to be certain. 

Ps. 116: 3, The sorrows of death encompassed me; 
the pains of Sheol, ^IftSJ , took hold upon me ; i. e. dead- 
ly pains, such as lead to death, or occasion death, took 
hold upon me. See on Sam. 22: 6, and Ps. 18: 5 above. 

Ps. 139: 8, If I ascend to heaven thou art there ; if I 
make my bed in Sheol bi&SJ, thou art there ; i. e. if I 
ascend upwards, on high, thou art there ; or if I go 
downwards, into the world beneath, thou art there ; which 
is as much as to say, Thou art everywhere, or in all 
places. More than this cannot with any certainty be de- 
duced from this passage ; indeed, more than this is alto- 
gether improbable. 

Ps. 141: 7, Our bones are scattered at the mouth of 
Sheol; i. e. at the mouth of the sepulchre or grave 3 as our 



§ 1. Meaning of±i&W . 87 

Version has it ; not at the mouth of hell or the world of 
woe. 

Prov. 1: 12. Let us swallow them up alive, as the 
grave, b^fitf?3 ; and whole, as those who go down to the 
pit. So our English Version ; and plainly, according to 
the sense of the Original. The writer is repeating the 
words of men of violence and blood, who are mutually 
exhorting one another to the work of destruction. The 
meaning of their words is, Let us kill or destroy, &s Sheol 
does, i. e. extensively and fatally as the grave. 

Prov. 15: 11, Sheol and destruction, 'p^SSO yi&V , 
are before the Lord ; how much more the hearts of the 
children of men ? English Version, hell. But here the 
under-world, the deep, dark, secret world, seems plainly 
to be meant. So the accompanying word, *p^5tt , seems 
clearly to imply. The sentiment is ; ' God, whose sight 
penetrates even the dark recesses of the grave or under- 
world, most certainly must know what passes in the hearts 
of the children of men.' 

Prov. 27: 20, Sheol, bT&tt? , and destruction are never 
satiated ; so the eyes of a man are never satisfied ; i. e, 
the grave and the place of destruction, viz. the sepulchre 
or under-world, are insatiable ; in other words, death is 
always making its ravages, and is never satiated. So the 
Latins, mors rapax, orcus rapax. The nature of the im- 
agery here, requires us to understand Sheol as meaning 
grave ; and not, with our English translation, hell. 

Prov. 30: 15, 16, There are three things which are 
never satisfied, yea four things say not, It is enough ; 
the grave (iitfttj), the barren womb, the earth that is not 
filled with water, and the fire that saith not, It is enough. 
Here Sheol is correctly rendered in our common version. 
But the same reason which led to render it grave here, 



88 § 1. Meaning of \f\$$5. 

applies in its full force to Prov. 27: 20, where is the same 
image and the same sentiment. 

Ecc. 9: 10, there is no work, nor device, nor knowl- 
edge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, Jdi&IBS, whither thou goest; 
i. e. as our English Version has it, in the grave, whither 
thou goest. This is plainly the sense of the passage ; 
c Be very diligent while life continues ; for death will 
quickly intervene, and then all purposes and efforts, such 
as you are engaged in, will cease.' 

Cant. 8: 6, love is strong as death ; jealousy is cruel 
as Sheol ; English Version, cruel as the grave. This is 
plainly the sense ; for the imagery is here taken, from 
the unsparing, cruel, and irresistible power of the grave 
or death ; which jealousy resembles, when it is highly 
excited. 

Is. 5: 14, Therefore Sheol, bitfUi , hath enlarged her- 
self, and opened her mouth without measure : English 
Version, hell. But here, the under-world or region of 
the dead is personified, and represented as a great, ter- 
rible, and insatiable monster, opening wide its jaws, even 
without measure, in order to swallow up and devour the 
intemperate revellers, who are mentioned in the preced- 
ing context. It is an image of the like nature with that 
which is presented in Prov. 27: 20. 30: 16. 

[Note. Is. 7: 11 is inserted in Calasio's Concordance, as an in- 
stance of Sheol. But the word here, according to the best copies 
of the Hebrew Bible, is nVi$ k i , request, petition; not nVtf'J, 
Sheol.] 

Is. 14: 9, Sheol, *>1fttt5 , from beneath is moved for 
thee, to meet thee at thy coming. The prophet is speak- 
ing of the king of Babylon, who was to be slain, and when 
he should go down into the under-world or Sheol, the 
ghosts or umbrae of the dead there would rise up to meet 



§ 1. Meaning iff 'MfiWJ. 89 

him with insult and contumely. Our English Version 
renders Sheol, hell. But plainly the region of the dead, 
the land of ghosts is here meant ; for in verse 18, ' all 
the kings of the nations are said to repose in glory there, 
i. e. to lie in their sepulchres, attended with all the en- 
signs of splendor which were deposited around the bodies 
of deceased kings. 

Is. 14: 15, yet thou [the king of Babylon] shalt be 
brought down to Sheol, bitttt ; English Version, hell 
The word here is most evidently in the same sense as 
above ; for so the parallelism which follows clearly shews, 
viz. " to the sides of the pit. 5 ' 

Is. 28: 15, ye have said, We have a covenant with 
death, and with Sheol, 5:1815 , are we at agreement ; Eng- 
lish Version, hell. The meaning is, ' We have covenant- 
ed with death and Sheol, i. e. the grave, not to seize upon 
us, not to harm us. So the sequel shews ; for the pro- 
phet represents them as next saying, "When the over- 
flowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come un- 
to us." 

Is. 28: 18, your covenant with death shall be disan- 
nulled ; your agreement with Sheol, inarms , shall not 
stand ; English Version, hell. This is a repetition of the 
passage above, in which the words, of course, are em- 
ployed in the same sense. 

Is. 38: 18, For Sheol, Vlttp , cannot praise thee ; 
death cannot celebrate thee ; English Version of Sheol, 
grave. The meaning here is plain, viz. How can the 
dead, or those in the sepulchre praise thee ? Surely we 
cannot well suppose Hezekiah means to say here, that 
hell, i. e. the world of torment, cannot praise God. He 
did not expect to perish forever, when he should die. 

But when he says, " Sheol cannot praise thee," does 
9 



90 § 1. Meaning ef^iSSp . 

he mean, that after death there is no ability to praise God. 
no existence of the powers and capacities of the soul 1 I 
think not. It seems to me clearly, that this is not his 
design ; although not a few of the later critics have affirm- 
ed it to be so. Shall we represent the Hebrews, and a 
Hebrew monarch enlightened as Hezekiah was, as being 
more ignorant in respect to futurity than the Egyptians 1 
The people of God, who lived under the light of a revela- 
tion, more ignorant than those who were in the midst of 
Egyptian night ! Believe this who will, I must have 
stronger evidence of its correctness than I have yet found, 
in order to give it credit. 

I regard the simple meaning of this controverted 
place, (and of others like it, e. g. Ps. 6: 5 (6). 30: 9 (10). 
88: 11. 115: 17. comp. US: 17), as being this, viz. 
f The dead can no more give thanks to God, nor cele- 
brate his praises, among the living on earth, and thus 
cause his name to be glorified by them, or thus do him 
honour before them. So the sequel of Is. 38: 18 ; " The 
living, the living, he shall praise thee ; as I do this day : 
the father to the children shall make known thy truth, 
i. e. thy faithfulness." This last clause makes the whole 
plain ; and one is ready to wonder, that so much skepti- 
cism about the views of the Hebrews in regard to a fu- 
ture state of existence, could have been eked out of the 
verse in question. 

Is. 57: 9, and [thou] didst debase thyself even to 
Sheol, Vl^ti . The prophet is addressing the idolatrous 
Jews here, who are represented under the image of an 
unchaste female, debasing herself by her vile practices. 
There is a kind of paronomasia here upon the word She- 
ol " Thou didst debase thyself to Sheol,' 7 means thou 
didst prostrate thyself very loio; and the force of the word 



§ 1. Meaning tif±htK& . 91 

consists in referring both to the physical and moral de- 
basement of a prostitute. The sense of Sheol, which is 
referred to or built upon in the figurative use of it here, 
is under-world, the icorld deep beneath. 

Ezek. 31: 15, in the day when he went down to 
Sheol, ftb&lB , I caused a mourning ; English Version, 
grave. Rightly, for the prophet is speaking of the death 
of the king of Egypt. 

Ezek. 31: 16, when I cast him down to Sheol, ftb&t5, 
with them that descend into the pit ; English Version, 
hell. But as the subject is the same, and the affirmation 
clearly the same, as in the preceding verse ; so the ver- 
sion should be, grave. 

Ezek. 31: 17, They also went down into Sheol 
(Hr^e) w * tn mm > unt0 tnem tnat be slain with the 
sword ; English Version, hell. But plainly, the whole 
relates to physical death here, not to spiritual. So the 
context clearly shews. 

Ezek. 32: 21, The strong among the mighty [the 
mighty heroes], shall address him from Sheol, blfcttlj ; 
English Version, hell. Here, the king of Egypt is spoken 
of, and described as failing by the sword with other men 
of war, and going down to Sheol, w T here he is addressed, 
(as the king of Babylon is represented to be in Is. 14: 9 
seq.), by the rvjC"") , the umbrae in the under-world. Of 
course, grave, region of the dead, must be the meaning 
of Sheol here. 

Ezek. 32: 27, They shall not lie with the mighty that 
are fallen of the uncircumcised ; which are gone down 
to Sheol (WfcttD) with their weapons of war ; English Ver- 
sion, hell. But are " the weapons of war/' then, carried 
along with fallen heroes to the icorld of future punish- 
ment ? Or are they merely buried with them, according 
to a very common usage, in the grave 1 



92 § 1. Meaning of^wti . 

Hos. 13: 14, I will ransom them from Sheol : O death, 
I will be thy plagues ! O Sheol, bn«f , I will be thy de- 
struction ! English Version, grave. If this be not the 
sense, then the sacred writer has declared, that God will 
be the destruction of the vjorld of icoe ; i. e. that he will 
destroy it, or bring it to an end ; a sentiment for which 
I can find no parallel in the Scriptures. But God has of- 
ten declared, that the power of the grave shall cease, 
i. e. that a resurrection from the dead or the grave shall 
take place. This is, of course, to destroy Sheol, i. e. to 
disannul its power. 

Amos 9: 2, Though they dig into Sheol, bi&UJ , my 
hand shall take them thence ; English Version, hell. 
The sense clearly is, ' Although they dig very deep, 
down into the under-world, viz. in order to conceal them- 
selves, yet thence my hand shall take them [the wicked.] 

Jonah 2: 2 (3), out of the belly of Sheol I cried ; 
and thou didst hear my voice ; English Version, hell. 
But Jonah was not in hell, i. e. not in the place of future 
torment, but in the belly of the fish, and deep down, un- 
der the surface of the water. So the meaning of under- 
world here, is very obvious. 

Hab. 2: 5, Who [the Chaldean] enlargeth his appe- 
tite as Sheol, blW2)3 , and like death cannot be satisfied, 
English Version, hell. But here the sense is plainly the 
same as above, in Prov. 27: 20. 30: 16. Is. 5: 14 ; i. e. 
the passage refers to the insatiable appetite of death 
(mors rapax), or the grave. 

These are all the passages in which the word Sheol, 
io&KZJ , appears to me to occur, in the Old Testament, in 
the sense given under No. I, above. On these, thus pre- 
sented in detail before the reader, I must beg leave now 
to make a few remarks. 



§ 2. Remarks on the translation of Sheol. 93 

§ 2. Remarks on the common translation of Sheol. 

There can be no reasonable doubt, that Sheol does 
most generally mean the wider-world, the grave or sepul- 
chre, the tcorld of the dead, in the Old Testament Scrip- 
tures. It is very clear that there are many passages, 
where no other meaning can reasonably be assigned to it. 
Accordingly, our English translators have rendered the 
word Sheol grave, in 30 instances* out of the whole 64 
instances in which it occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures. 
In many of the remaining cases, where they have given a 
different version of the word, i. e. translated it hell, it is 
equally clear that it should have been rendered, grave or 
region of the dead. This has been clearly shewn, by 
producing the instances in the above exhibition of exam- 
ples. 

In three cases, they have recognized the same princi- 
ple, (at least this seems to have been their view), viz. 
Numb. 16: 30, 33. Job 17: 16, where it is translated, 
pit. 

In regard to most of the cases in which they have 
rendered the word hell, it may be doubtful whether they 
meant thereby to designate the tcorld of future torment. 
The incongruity of such a rendering, at least in not a 
few cases, has been already pointed out, in the citations 
of the respective examples above, and therefore need not 
be here repeated. The inconstancy with which they 
have sometimes rendered the word Sheol, in the same 

* The instances are in Gen. 37: 35. 42: 38. 44: 29, 31. 1 Sam. 
2: 6. 1 Kings 2: 6, 9. Job 7: 9. 14: 13. 17: 13. 21: 13. 24: 19. Ps. 
6: 5, 30: 3. 31: 17. 49: 14, 15. 83: 3. 89: 49. 141: 7. Prov. 1: 12. 
30: 16. Ecc. 9: 10. Cant. 8: 6. Is. 14: 11. 38: 10, 18. Ezek. 31: 15. 
Hos. 13: 14 bis. 

9* 



94 § 2. Remarks on the translation of Sheol 

connection and with the same sense, is a striking circum- 
stance, which cannot but be regarded with some wonder 
by an attentive inquirer. Nor is this always to be attri- 
buted to different translators, (who are known to have 
been employed in making the English version) ; but the 
same translator has been occasionally inconsistent with 
himself; e.g. Ezek. 31: 15, compared with Ezek. 31: 
16, 17. 

But setting aside all this, and simply recurring to the 
Original as a foundation for our exegesis, is there not 
some reason to believe, that in some of the cases where 
Sheol is employed, it stands as a word employed in a se- 
condary sense, in order to designate the future world of 
woe ? 

An interesting question ; the solution of which de- 
pends on the nature of figurative language, and the man- 
ner in which it is employed, in order to designate the 
things of a future world. 

§ 3. Manner of using figurative language, in respect to 
the objects of a future world. 

On the nature of figurative language, then, as employ- 
ed to designate the objects of the invisible world, I must 
beg leave here to suggest a few considerations, which 
may serve more fully to explain what I shall say in the 
sequel. 

Spoken language is the expression of ideas by means 
of sounds, i. e. articulate words. Written language is the 
expression of ideas by means of conventional signs, i. e. 
letters, which are presented to the eye, and through the 
medium of this, find access to the mind. Both spoken 
and written language is merely the expression of our 



§ 3. Nature of figurative language. 95 

ideas. Both agree in this, viz. that they are conventional ; 
conventional I mean, as to the particular sounds or forms 
of which they consist. That language is natural to man, 
as much so as understanding and reason are, is what I 
fully believe. But that there may be a great variety of 
sounds employed, in order to convey the same idea ; that, 
for example, different individuals may call the Sun by 
names of very different sounds, all know to be matter of 
fact. But this would not prove that the faculty of speech 
is not a constituent part of the nature of man. It only 
proves, that there are various ways in which this faculty 
may be exercised. 

I call spoken language, therefore, conventional as to 
its form or sounds, merely because nature does not make 
any one language universal and necessary ; and what is 
not universal and necessary, may with propriety be called 
conventional, using this word in a modified sense of it, 
to denote w r hat results from the voluntary agreement and 
usages of men. 

In the same manner all written language is conven- 
tional. Every nation has its own peculiar modes of writ- 
ing ; some of which differ very widely from others, not 
only in the forms of letters, but in the letters or alphabets 
themselves. 

But all language, whether spoken or written, being 
only the expression of ideas which are entertained by the 
human mind ; an important question remains respecting 
these ideas themselves, viz. What are the sources of 
them ? Or, w r hence does the mind derive them ? When 
this question is answered, others can easily be raised, 
which stand in close connection with it. 

It is now pretty generally agreed, (at least in the 
English w r orld, so far as I know), that the sources of all 



96 § 3. Nature of figurative language. 

our definite ideas, are sensation, reflection, and conscious- 
ness. [May we not add, moral nature ?] Some might 
contend against consciousness, because they resolve it in- 
to reminiscence of experience either by sensation or re- 
flection. This however is not important to my purpose. 
The fact is all I wish for here ; not to settle the question 
by what name it shall be called, 

But how extensive are the objects of our senses, and 
of reflection and consciousness? Plainly they are limit- 
ed to the visible, perceptible, external world without us, 
and to our own internal man. All language is formed 
merely to designate, in its original use, the ideas which 
we derive from the one or the other of these sources. If 
we go beyond this circle, and strive to express concep- 
tions of other objects, the mind employs the words which 
already exist, and which have originated from one of the 
sources above mentioned, in a secondary, a qualified, or 
a figurative sense. It traces some analogy between 
things within the circle of its knowledge, with those 
which are believed to lie beyond the boundaries of its im- 
mediate perception, and applies language in such a man- 
ner as accords with this supposed analogy. 

For example, and that I may more fully illustrate my 
meaning ; God is not the object of any of our senses, in- 
ternal or external. But by the powers of reason, and by 
the force of the moral nature that exists within us, we ar- 
rive at a conviction, that there must exist, and that there 
does exist, a Being above us, of almighty power, and of 
infinite wisdom, who has created, and who governs all 
things. We undertake to describe him. But we have 
not seen him ; we have not, in any way, been able to 
subject him, as he is in himself, to the examination of any 
of our faculties. The language that we speak did not 



§ 3. Nature of figurative language. 97 

originate from those who had ever formed any concep- 
tions of the Divinity through the medium of their senses. 
Of course, we have no words which directly convey to us, 
by themselves, the idea of God as he is in himself. We 
can only describe him, by language employed in the way 
of analogy. We regard him as a rational being ; and as 
such, we borrow terms, descriptive in themselves of the 
various parts or passions and affections of men, in order 
to convey ideas of the Supreme Being. We speak of 
God as having a heart, and hands, and arms, and feet ; 
of exercising the affections of anger and love, hatred and 
benevolence, revenge and compassion ; in a word, we ap- 
ply to him most of the expressions used by men, to de- 
scribe the parts or passions and affections of each other. 
We are compelled to do so, by the poverty of human lan- 
guage, by the original principles of its formation. 

The same holds true, in regard to all descriptions of 
the invisible world, of heaven and hell. Heaven is re- 
presented as a paradise, i. e. a pleasure garden ; as a city 
with most magnificent walls, structures and ornaments ; 
as a place of perpetual feasting and delight ; as a land of 
rest and overflowing plenty ; as a magnificent palace, in 
which the guests appear adorned with princely robes and 
splendid crowns, and are admitted to the immediate pre- 
sence of the great King of kings. 

Hell is represented as an abyss ; a bottomless pit ; 
a lake that burneth with fire and brimstone, the smoke 
of which ascendeth up forever and ever; a Gehenna, 
where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched ; 
as a place of outer darkness, of unceasing and eternal 
gloom ; as a loathsome dungeon, a horrid prison ; aa a 
place of torture, and anguish, and unspeakable pain; a 
place of banishment from God, on which all the vials of 



98 §3. Nature of figurative language. 

his wrath are poured out ; and by other such tremendous 
images, all drawn from natural objects of terror and dis- 
tress. 

That the Scriptures every where pursue this method 
of representing to us the things of the invisible world, 
must be familiarly known to every attentive reader of 
them. That none of these descriptions are to be literally 
understood, seems to be exceedingly obvious ; for if any 
one is to be literally understood, ivhich is the one 1 Who 
will determine this question ? If then there are no parti- 
cular grounds for making any such determination, we 
must either construe all of them figuratively, or all of 
them literally. Not the latter, because then the Bible 
must be made to contradict itself, beyond all possibility 
of reconciliation. It must also be made to contradict the 
nature of the spiritual and invisible world. The former, 
therefore, is the only principle which can be admitted. 

The sum of all is, that analogy is brought to the aid 
of the mind, in such descriptions; which the poverty of 
language forbade the sacred writers to make out, by any 
use of words in their literal sense. Such a use of them 
would be, to make the invisible world a mere copy of the 
visible one ; a world of spirits altogether like a world of 
matter. But this cannot, with any show of reason, be 
charged upon the sacred writers ; and therefore we must 
admit, that the language of which I have been speaking, 
is employed only in a qualified, figurative, analogical 
sense. 

If this principle, so plain, so reasonable, so universal- 
ly admitted in many cases, be well understood, and thor- 
oughly admitted by my readers in the case before us ; 
we are now prepared, to make a near approach to the 
question, Whether Sheol is ever employed in the figura- 
tive or secondary sense, in the Old Testament ? 



§ 3. Nature of figurative language. 99 

But in order to prepare the way still further, so that 
we may obtain satisfaction in regard to this subject of in- 
quiry, let us contemplate, for a moment, the use which 
the Scriptures have made of the words live and life, die 
and death, in respect to the happiness of the righteous, 
and the punishment of the wicked. 

To live and to have life are, beyond all doubt, very 
often employed in the Scriptures, in order to denote the 
reward which the righteous shall receive for obedience 
to the divine commands. Thus Moses says, in the name 
of God, to the children of Israel, Lev. 18: 5, Ye shall 
keep my statutes and my judgments ; which, if a man do, 
he shall live in them ; which is repeated, Neh. 9: 29. 
Ezek. 20: 11, 13,21. So Prov. 4: 4, Keep my com- 
mandments, and live ; which is repeated, Prov. 7: 2. 
Also Is. 53: 3, Hear, and your soul shall live. Ezek. 
3: 21, If thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous 
sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, he shall 
not die; repeated in Ezek. 18: 9, 17. 33: 13, 15, 16, 
19. Seek ye me, and ye shall live, Amos 4: 5, 6. 

In the New Testament the instances are very numer- 
ous. Luke 10: 28, this do, and thou shalt live. John 
6: 15, he that eateth me shall live by me, [Christ]. John 
11: 25, He that believeth, though he were dead, yet shall 
he live. John 14: 19, Because I live, ye shall live also, 
Rom. 8. 13, If ye, through the Spirit, mortify the deeds 
of the flesh, ye shall live. Heb. 10: 28, The just shall 
live by faith. 2 Tim. 2: 11, If we be dead with him 
[Christ], we shall aiso live with him. Heb. 12: 9, Shall 
we not much more be in subjection to the Father of our 
spirits, and live ? John 4: 9, He hath sent his Son, that 
we might live through him. 

These examples may suffice, in regard to the use of 



100 > § 3. Nature of figurative language. 

the verb live. The noun, life, is altogether correspondent 
with it, in regard to the meanings which it is employed 
to convey. E. g. Deut. 30: 15, See, I [Moses] have set 
before thee, this day, life and good, and death and evil. 
Here, the words good and evil are added, merely as ex- 
planatory of life and death; or rather, I may say, they 
are employed as mere synonymes with them, and serve, 
by repetition, to give intensity to the affirmation of the 
speaker, according to the usual custom of the sacred wri- 
ters. The same expression is repeated, in Deut. 30: 19, 
with the omission of good and evil ; and manifestly in 
the same sense as in v. 15. So Jer. 21: 8, I set before 
you the way of life, and the way of death. Deut. 32: 
47, For it is not a vain thing, because it is your life. Ps. 
16: 11, Thou wilt shew me the path of life. Prov. 2: 
19, neither take they hold of the paths of life. Prov. 3: 
18, She is a tree of life, to them that lay hold upon her. 
Prov. 4: 22, They [the words of God] are life unto those 
that find them. Prov. 4: 23, Keep thy heart with all 
diligence, for out of it are the issues of life. Prov. 5: 6, 
Lest thou shouldest ponder the paths of life, her ways are 
moveable. Prov. 8: 35, Whoso findeth me, frndeth life. 
To the same purpose, are Prov. 10: 11, 17. 11: 30. 12; 
28. 13: 12, 14. 14: 27. 15: 4. 16: 22. 18: 21. 21: 21. 
Ezek. 33: 15. Mai. 2: 5. 

In the New Testament the instances are very numer- 
ous, E. g. Matt. 18: 8 and Mark 9: 43, It is better for 
thee to enter into life, halt or maimed, etc. So 18: 9 
and Mark 9: 45, It is better to enter into life, with one 
eye, etc. Matt. 19: 17, If thou wilt enter into life, keep 
the commandments. John 1: 4, In him [Christ] was 
life. John 3: 36, He that belie veth not the Son shall not 
see life. John 5: 29, the resurrection of life. John 5: 



§ 3. Nature of figurative language. 101 

40, ye will not come unto me, that ye might have life. 
In the like sense, John 6: 33, 35, 48, 51, 53, 63. 8: 12. 
11: 25. 14: 6. 20: 31. Acts 3: 15. Rom. 5: 17, 18. 8: 
2, 6, 10. 2 Cor. 2: 16. 3: 6. 4: 10, 12. 5: 4. Gal. 3: 21. 
Phil. 2: 16. Col. 3: 4. 2 Tim. 1: 1, 10. James 1: 12. 
1 Pet. 3: 7. 2 Pet. 1: 3. 1 John 1: 1, 2. 5: 12, 16. Rev. 
2: 7, 10. 21:6. 22: 1, 14, 17, 

Such are the examples of the method, in which the 
words live and life are employed in the Scriptures. That 
they designate the reward of the righteous, whether in 
time or eternity, is a clear case ; so clear, that I deem all 
further effort to establish the point, entirely needless. 
The examples themselves are the most powerful argument 
which can be adduced. 

On the other hand, it is equally plain and certain, 
that the words die and death are employed, in order to 
designate the punishment of the wicked. From the very 
numerous examples of this kind, I would present the fol- 
lowing ; viz. 

Ezek. 18: 4, The soul that sinneth shall die ; which 
is repeated in 18: 20. So also, in Ezek. 18: 17, he shall 
not die; v. IS, he shall die ; v. 21, he shall not die; v. 
21, Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should 
die ? v. 24, In his trespass that he hath trespassed, . . . 
shall he die ; v. 26, in his iniquity that he hath done shall 
he die ; v. 28, he that turneth away from his transgres- 
sion .... shall not die ; v. 32, I have no pleasure in the 
death of him that dieth. Prov. 15: 10, he that hateth re- 
proof shall die. Prov. 19: 16, He that despiseth my ways 
shall die. Ezek. 33: 8, the wicked man shall die in his 
iniquity ; so also in v. 9. In 33: 11, Why will ye die, 
O house of Israel; v. 13 he that hath committed iniquity 
shall die; v. 14, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt 
10 



102 §3. Nature of figurative language. 

surely die ; v. 15, if the wicked . . . walk in the statutes 
of life .... he shall not die. Prov. 23: 13, If thou beat- 
est him with a rod, he shall not die. 

The instance of threatening in Gen. 2: 17, In the 
day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die, (and the 
like expression in Gen. 3: 3, 4), is to be construed ac- 
cording to the evident tenor of the above examples. 

In the New Testament, the usage is exceedingly 
plain, in various examples ; e. g. John 5: 60, This is the 
bread that cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat 
thereof and not die. Rom. 8: 31, If ye live after the 
flesh, ye shall die. John 8: 21, ye shall seek me, and 
shall die in your sins. 

In the like manner is the word death employed, in 
order to designate the evils consequent upon the com- 
mission of sin ; e. g. Deut 30: 15, See, I have set before 
you, this day, life and good, death and evil ; in Jer. 21: 
8, I have set before you the way of life, and the way of 
death. Prov. 5: 5, Her feet go down to death. Prov. 8: 
36, All they that hate me love death. Prov. 12: 28, In 
the path-ways thereof, there is no death. Ezek. 18: 32, 
I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked ; so also 
in 33: 11. 

In the New Testament this usage is very prominent ; 
e. g. John 8: 51, If a man keep my saying, he shall never 
see death. Rom. 6: 23, The wages of sin is death. 
Rom. 6: 21, The end of those things is death. Rom. 
6: 16, Whether [ye are the servants] of sin unto death. 
Rom. 7: 5, The motions of sin did work to bring forth 
fruit unto death. Rom. 7: 10, The commandment to 
life, I found to be unto death. Rom. 7: 13, Was then 
that which was good, made death unto me? Rom. 7: 
24, Who shall deliver me from the body of this death ? 



§ 3. Nature of figurative language. 103 

Rom. 8: 2, The law of the Spirit of life .... hath freed 
me from the law of sin and death. Rom. 8: 6, To be 
carnally minded is death. 2 Cor. 2: 16, To the one we 
are the savour of death unto death ; i. e. a deadly savour 
causing spiritual death. 2 Cor. 7: 10, The sorrow of the 
world worketh death. 2 Tim. 1: 10, Our Saviour Jesus 
Christ, who hath abolished death. Heb. 2: 14, That 
through death he might destroy him that had the power 
of death. James 1: 15, Sin, when finished, bringeth 
forth death. 1 John 3: 14, He that loveth not his broth- 
er, abideth in death. Rev. 2: 11, He that overcometh, 
shall not be hurt of the second death. Rev. 20: 6, On 
them he second death had no power. Rev. 20: 14, This 
is the second death. 

The importance of the principle of interpretation, 
which is connected with examples of this nature, is my 
apology for producing them at such length. When the 
mind once becomes entirely satisfied, that the objects of 
the invisible world can be revealed to us only in language 
which is already formed, and formed from the notices 
which our senses, external or internal, take of the objects 
within their reach ; it is then that we begin to have some 
due apprehension of the nature and extent of figurative 
language, as employed by the sacred writers. These 
writers had a vivid impression of the joys of heaven and 
the pains of hell, of the reward of virtue and the pun- 
ishment of vice, in the world to come. These ideas they 
could not convey, in language which originated from 
notice of these objects taken by any of our senses ; there 
was no such language for their use. They must, then, 
from the nature of the case, employ such language as 
they had ; they could not use such as they had not, nor 
such as would be unintelligible to others. Of course, 



104 § 3. Nature of figurative language. 

they must employ language, which was originally design- 
ed to convey ideas of impressions received by our exter- 
nal or internal senses ; and consequently, language de- 
signating ideas of sensible objects, in its •primary and 
literal acceptation. 

If now we make the inquiry, why live and life, die 
and death, should be employed to represent the joys and 
sufferings of the world to come, the answer will not be 
difficult. Life is of all things most dear. " All that a 
man hath, will he give for his life." Death, of course, 
is of all things most dreaded. It is the consummation 
of all suffering ; the highest penalty which can be inflict- 
ed. 

Should one, then, range the whole compass of human 
language, he could find no two terms so significant as 
these, in order to designate the joys of heaven or the 
pains of hell. To do this, they must indeed be figura- 
tively employed. But the same is true of all other words, 
that are or could be employed for the same purpose. Of 
course this is no objection to the use of them. 

It is easy to see, therefore, why the sacred writers 
have chosen these highly significant words, in order to 
convey an idea of the impression made on their own 
minds, respecting the joys of heaven and the pains of hell. 
" The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God eternal 
life. 39 Is it in the power of language to convey a stron- 
ger impression of the retributions that will be made in 
the invisible world, than such an expression conveys ? 



§ 4. Secondary signification of Sheol. 

If the mind is satisfied in regard to the view of the 
subject given above, there remains but little to be said 5 



§4. Secondary signification of 'bifc^p'- 105 

in order to satisfy it respecting the possibility of applying 
Sheol (bWJJ) in a similar way. Sheol and death are 
most intimately connected. They often stand together 
in the same verse, constituting the corresponding parts 
of a parallelism. Whatever may be said of death, as an 
image of terror and distress, may be applied with equal 
force to Sheol, The grave, the under-world, the region 
of the dead, is of course most intimately connected with 
death itself. 

Sheol then may be used in a secondary sense, to de- 
note the world of misery, the region of " the second 
death." It is no objection to this, that it is generally 
employed in its first and literal sense ; for such is the 
case with the words live, life, die, death. Yet this does 
not at all prove, that these latter words are never employ- 
ed in any other than the literal sense. Such a principle 
indeed, if admitted, would prove that no words are, or 
can be, employed in & figurative sense ; for, in a majori- 
ty of cases, nearly all words have a literal sense. 

Suppose now that I should say, The word God some- 
times means a carved piece of wood, a molten image, or 
an object of the natural world ; and because it sometimes 
means a block of wood, therefore it can never designate 
the true God? Would this reasoning be regarded by 
any candid and intelligent man as of any validity ? Sure- 
ly not. Suppose then I should aver, that because Sheol 
usually means grave, sepulchre, under-world, therefore it 
never can mean the world of woe ; would this reasoning 
be any more conclusive? Plainly not. 

If then the words to die and death, are often employ- 
ed to designate the misery of the wicked, may we not 
expect that Sheol will partake, with them, of this same 
usage ? 

10* 



106 § 4. Secondary signification o/'bl&NIJ. 

It will not be said, I trust, that such an expectation 
is unreasonable or unnatural. 

We have seen, then, that there is nothing which can 
determine, a priori, against such a use of the word Sheol 
as has been just described. We may now come, there- 
fore, to examine the question of fact itself, viz. whether the 
word is actually so employed, without being prejudiced 
against any of the proofs or evidences which maybe prof- 
fered, in order to shew that such is probably the case. 



II, The cases in ichich sheol may designate the fu- 
ture world of woe, I shall now subjoin. 

Job 21: 13, They [the wicked] spend their days in 
wealth, and in a moment go down to Sheol. 

Ps. 9: 17 (18), The wicked shall be turned into She- 
ol, and all the nations that forget God. 

Prov. 5: 5, Her feet go down to death, her steps take 
hold on Sheol. 

Prov. 9: 18, But he knoweth not that the ghosts are 
there, and that her guests are in the depths of Sheol. 

Prov. 23: 14, Thou shalt beat him with a rod, and 
shalt deliver his soul from Sheol. 

I might add some other texts apparently of the same 
tenor with these, but I shall defer the mention of them 
until I have made some remarks on those already produ- 
ced. My great object is not to multiply the number of 
texts, which may possibly be brought within the limits 
of such a meaning as I here suppose Shod to have ; but 
to illustrate the principle, that is concerned with the ex- 
egesis of texts which exhibit the word Sheol. 

In attentively considering the texts just adduced, is 
it not plain, that the exegesis would be an easy and na- 



§ 4. Secondary signification of ^i^ui. 107 

tural one, to apply them to the future punishment of the 
wicked ? I do not say eternal punishment here, because, 
if we admit that Sheol fhere designates future punishment, 
we must also admit, that it does not determine, of itself, 
the duration of that punishment. After what has been 
said above, of the Scriptural use of the words die and 
death, it cannot be said, with any show of reason, that it 
would be strange or singular, that Sheol should here de- 
signate future punishment ; I mean, that it cannot seem 
strange to any one who acknowledges the Scriptures as 
revealing the doctrine of future punishment in any form 
whatever. To those who do not acknowledge this, I am 
not addressing myself. Such have first to be convinced 
that the Bible is the word of God, before they can be con- 
vinced, by any proofs drawn from it, with regard to fu- 
ture punishment. Although they may not know it, or 
may be unwilling to acknowledge it, yet they are plainly 
skeptics as to the divine origin and authority of the Scrip- 
tures. To say that the Bible is the word of God, and yet 
to aver that there is no future punishment threatened by 
it, — is so palpable an exhibition either of ignorance, or 
of unbelief, or of dishonesty, that an ingenuous man can 
hardly believe in any professions of respect for the Bible, 
which such a person may make. 

The probability that Sheol designates the future pun- 
ishment of the wicked, in the passages just cited, depends 
perhaps, in a great measure, on the state of knowledge 
among the Hebrews, with regard to future rewards and 
punishments. I am well aware, as I have already hint- 
ed above, that there are critics who maintain, that the 
Hebrews had no knowledge or belief of any such doc- 
trine. But as it is now past all doubt, that the ancient 
Egyptians (of Moses' time) did believe and teach, very 



108 § 4. Secondary signification of^lk® . 

expressly, the doctrine in question ; I am not able to 
comprehend how Moses, " who was learned in all the 
wisdom of the Egyptians/' should have been ignorant of 
this doctrine. Nor, as I have already said, can I be per- 
suaded, without strong, yea irrefragable evidence, that 
the people of God, among whom were patriarchs and pro- 
phets, knew less respecting a future state of rewards and 
punishment, than their heathen neighbours who were 
wholly destitute of any special revelation. 

We have, then, no good reason to believe, that the 
ancient Hebrews rejected the doctrine of the soul's im- 
mortality, or even doubted of it. The modern Saddu- 
cees, indeed, entertained doubts of this nature. But this 
sect arose only a short time before the commencement 
of the Christian era; and the peculiar opinions which it 
maintained, were derived, beyond all reasonable doubt, 
from skeptical Greek philosophers. The Pharisees held 
fast to the doctrines, on this subject, which had been de- 
rived by tradition from their ancestors. 

Circumstances being such, then, as these considera- 
tions shew them to be, I see not how it can ever be made 
out, with any good degree of certainty, that the texts in 
question have no reference to future punishment. I ad- 
mit, that they are susceptible of another interpretation, 
i. e. that another interpretation is possible. But this does 
not reach the point in question. Are they not also sus- 
ceptible of an interpretation, which would make them to 
designate the future misery of the wicked ? Is not this 
latter interpretation even more probable than the former ? 
An answer to these questions, will touch the difficulty 
which the case presents. 

The first question has been already answered, by the 
examples produced, of the manner in which the words 



§4. Secondary signification of y-\& % ti. 109 

die and death are employed, by the sacred writers. In 
regard to the second question ; it may be said, that the 
example in Job 21: 13 is not altogether so probable as 
to afford entire satisfaction. Verses 17, 18, 21, 30 — 33, 
it may be alleged, seem rather to incline the mind to 
construe SJieol in v. 13 as meaning grave ; and so our 
English translators have done. 

I have no doubt, that the word Sheol in this case 
does involve the idea of sudden death or dying, as a ca- 
lamity. The question however is, whether in the mind 
of the speaker, in such a case, any thing more was pro- 
bably contemplated, than the simple fact of sudden natur- 
al death ? The answer to this must of course depend on 
the fact, whether the speaker believed in any future re- 
tribution, any future punishment of the vicious and re- 
warding of the virtuous. In case he did, (and who will 
undertake to shew that he did not ?) then how can we 
avoid the apprehension, that he connected with going 
suddenly and violently down to Sheol, the idea of a mis- 
erable condition there ? How can we rationally avoid 
such an apprehension? 

In regard to Prov. 5: 5 and 9: 18, both of which have 
respect to prostitutes, one may ask, What was there in 
intercourse with them, which tended to sudden and pre- 
mature death, any more than existed in every Harem of 
the East, where polygamy is practiced? The question, 
at the present day, could be easily answered ; as disease, 
in some of its most awful forms, is the usual concomitant 
of illicit intercourse of this nature. But this disease, so 
far as I know, was unknown to the ancient world. The 
Greeks and Romans seem to have known nothing of it. 
Heathen nations abroad knew nothing of it, until it was 
communicated to them by Europeans. There was, then, 



110 §4. Secondary signification of 't^irj. 

nothing but excess in the intercourse, which was of the 
nature in question, which tended to sudden or violent 
death — an excess as frequently practised in Harems, as 
among prostitutes. 

It is not difficult indeed to see, that a person devoted 
to illicit intercourse with lewd women, might easily squan- 
der his estate and reduce himself to poverty. But in 
regard to the danger of life itself, no important difference 
can be made out between this case, and that which exists 
in Harems filled with wives and concubines. 

How then can Prov. 5: 5 and 9: 18 have any special 
significancy, if Sheol does not here mean something more 
than grave ? Neither sudden death, nor violent death, 
appears to have been specially attendant upon the practice 
of illicit intercourse, in ancient times. What then is the 
significancy of the texts before us, if they do not refer 
to future retribution ? 

So in Prov. 23: 14, it is certainly clear that the mean- 
ing will be a good one, if we suppose Sheol here to desig- 
nate future punishment. At the same time it may be ad- 
mitted, that the other meaning, viz. sudden and violent 
death or premature death, is a possible one : yet on the 
whole can we regard it as probable, when the verse pre- 
ceding declares that correction will save a child from 
death 1 Is not death here the misery which is consequent 
upon sin? And if so, then does not Sheol in v. 14 mean, 
a state of punishment 1 

1 have spoken of sudden and violent death, or prema- 
ture death, as being the kind of death threatened to the 
wicked, whenever the threatening has reference merely 
to the present world. To suppose that death simply, 
without its being sudden or premature, is threatened in 
these cases, would be a supposition quite idle, and I had 






§4. Secondary signification of ?*&$. Ill 

almost said, ridiculous. Do not the righteous die, as 
well as the wicked ? Is it not " appointed unto all men 
once to die V And is there any distinction here, between 
the righteous and the wicked 1 None ; and of course, to 
threaten the wicked that they should die simply, would be 
to threaten them not at all ; for the same threat could, 
with equal truth, be made against the righteous. To die, 
then, in the usual manner, is not a special penalty of 
wickedness ; and therefore the threats of death, directed 
against particular acts of wickedness, can never be ration- 
ally regarded as having reference to any thing but sudden, 
premature, and violent death. That " the wicked shall 
not live out half their days," is an assurance, repeated in 
many forms and in a great variety of ways, in the Old 
Testament Scriptures. 

In this point of view it is possible, I concede, to in- 
terpret all the texts which exhibit Sheol as having a re- 
ference merely to the grave ; and therefore it is possible 
to interpret such ones as Prov. 5: 5. 9: 18 and 23: 14, as 
designating a death violent and premature, inflicted by 
the hand of heaven. 

After all, I cannot but feel inclined to believe, that 
the Hebrew, who employed the word Sheol in this way, 
did of course unite with this sense of it, the idea of misery 
consequent upon such premature and violent death. Hap- 
py or miserable, after death, the Hebrews must have sup- 
posed every one to be. What then was to be the state 
of him, whose wickedness was such as to bring sudden 
and premature death upon him ? Surely it cannot well 
be supposed, that the Hebrews believed such an one 
would be happy after death. 

When I say that the Hebrews believed men would 
be happy or miserable after death, I do not mean to aver, 



112 §4. Secondary signification qjfbl&Mp. 

that they had those distinct and definite notions on this 
subject, which we of the present day have. We should 
never forget, that it is the glorious preeminence of the 
gospel, to have " brought life and immortality to light." 
Christians too often forget this, while reasoning from the 
Old Testament. But then, to suppose that the Jews had 
no idea of a future state of retribution, is to suppose them 
to be destitute of the very first principles of even natural 
religion ; for " he who cometh unto God, must believe 
that he is, and that he is the rewarder of those that dili- 
gently seek him." 

On the whole, the balance seems decidedly to be in 
favour of the idea, that by usage Sheol, in some cases, 
did convey the idea of future misery, as connected with 
the sudden and violent death of the wicked. And this 
idea may be connected with a considerable number of 
passages, among the examples adduced under the first 
head above. 

The meaning of Sheol which lies upon the face of 
the sacred record, (if I may thus speak), is indeed that 
of grave, sepulchre, under-ioorld ; as 1 have given it in 
the general recension of the passages. But that the He- 
brew might connect, nay, that he probably did connect, 
the idea of consequential misery, with that of violent, sud- 
den, and premature death, cannot be rendered improba- 
ble. 

Indeed it is very difficult to render it improbable, 
when we add to the texts above cited, viz. Job 21: 13. 
Ps. 9: 17 (18). Prov. 5: 5. 9: 18. 23: 14, others which 
seem to be of the like nature ; e. g. 

Prov. 7: 27, Her house is the way to Sheol, going 

down to the chambers of death ; comp. Prov. 5: 5. 9: 18. 

Prov. 15: 24, The way of life is above, f6?»b , to the 



§ 4. Secondary signification qfb^N®. 113 

wise, that he may depart from Sheol, bltf&fa , beneath. 
The most natural meaning of this is; ' The way of life is 
that which conducts to happiness above, where God 
dwells ; and by pursuing this, one escapes Sheol or the 
world of misery beneath.' 

Let any one now, in addition to these texts, carefully 
inspect such passages as Num. 16: 30. 16: 33. Deut. 32: 
22, 1 Kings 2: 6. 2: 9. Ps. 49: 14, 15. Is. 5: 14, and 
then say, whether the Hebrew, believing in a state of fu- 
ture retribution, did not connect such language, in his 
own thoughts, with the apprehension of future misery in 
regard to those of whom he thus spake. 

I am indeed far from coinciding with those, who 
find the nature of a future world as fully and plainly re- 
vealed in the Old Testament as in the New. But I am 
equally far from those, who do not find it at all intimated 
there. Both these positions are extremes ; and as such, 
they should be avoided by every considerate inquirer. 

On the whole, it is to be regretted that our English 
translation has given occasion to the remarks, that those 
who made it have intended to impose on their readers, 
in any case, a sense different from that of the original 
Hebrew. The inconstancy with which they have render- 
ed the word Sheol, even in cases of the same nature, 
must obviously afford some apparent ground for this ob- 
jection against their version of it. But I cannot persuade 
myself, that men of so much integrity as the translators 
plainly were, and, I may add, of so much critical skill and 
acumen also, would undertake to mislead their readers in 
any point, where it is so easy to make corrections. I am 
much more inclined to believe, that in their day the word 
hell had not acquired, so exclusively as at present, the mean- 
ing of world of future misery. There is plain evidence 
11 



114 §4. Secondary signification of 518W. 

of this, in what is called the Apostles' Creed ; which says 
of Christ, (after his crucifixion), that " he descended in- 
to hell." Surely the Protestant English church did not 
mean to aver, that the soul of Christ went to the world of 
woe ; nor that it went to Purgatory. They did not be- 
lieve either of these doctrines. Hell then means, in this 
document, the under-world, the world of the dead. And 
so it has been construed, by the most intelligent critics 
of the English church. 

With this view of the meaning of the word hell, as 
employed in past times, we may easily account for it, 
why it has been so often employed as the translation of 
Sheol. This view of the subject, also, enables us to ac- 
quit the translators of any collusion in regard to this 
word : and to acquit them in this respect, does seem to 
be an act of simple justice, due to their ability, their in- 
tegrity, and uprightness. 

The sum of the evidence from the Old Testament in 
regard to Sheol, is, that the Hebrews did probably^ 

IN SOME CASES, CONNECT WITH THE USE OF THIS WORD, 
THE IDEA OF MISERY SUBSEQUENT TO THE DEATH OF THE 

body. It seems to me that we can safely believe this ; 
and to aver more than this would be somewhat hazardous, 
when all the examples of the word are duly considered. 



§ 5. Popular views of Sheol. 

To complete the view of Sheol here, I must beg leave 
to add a few suggestions on the popular ideas of the He- 
brews, respecting the nature of the under-world in gener- 
al. These may serve to explain some passages of the 
Old Testament, which, to say the least, must appear 



§5. Popular views of Ywti. 115 

somewhat peculiar, unless the popular notions respecting 
Skeol are well understood. 

The usual method, in which the Hebrews and almost 
all other ancient nations disposed of the dead bodies of 
men, was to bury them in the earth. Here they were 
consumed. From the grave none ever returned to greet 
their friends among the living ; nothing more was ever 
seen or heard of them. 

Still, there has been no nation on earth, so far as we 
know, certainly no one which had made any considera- 
ble advances in cultivation, which has believed that the ex- 
istence of man entirely terminates with his death, The 
soul, to which various forms and modes of existence have 
been assigned, has generally been supposed to survive 
the body, and to exist in a state peculiar to itself in many 
respects, and susceptible of various kinds and degrees of 
joy or of sorrow. 

Popular apprehensions in regard to the state of men 
after death, (and these only am I now considering), seem 
to have been very much affected by the usage of burying 
corpses in the ground, and by the fact that no more is 
seen or heard of men after they are thus buried. 

The desire of immortality seems to constitute a part 
of the instinctive affections of the human soul. The 
belief of immortality is connected intimately with this. 
But where this belief is cherished, it seems obviously ne- 
cessary, to assign some place to the soul for existence and 
action. Where shall this be? How shall they argue 
and conclude on this subject, who are unenlightened by 
revelation, or who reason merely from the impulse of im- 
agination, or from the notice of their own senses? 

History can answer the question how they have rea- 
soned. The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, and 



116 §5. Popular views ofymti. 

many other nations, have believed in the existence of a 
Hades, of an Infernus, i.e. of an under-world, of a re- 
gion of the dead, in which their departed friends lived 
and acted. Among each nation, popular superstition or 
imagination has attached peculiarities of their own to this 
under-world, or region of the dead ; but the general fea- 
tures of it are alike among all. 

The popular views of the Hebrews appear, in many 
respects, to have been of the like nature. With them, 
the grave and Sheol were often regarded as one and the 
same, when they designed merely to describe the decease 
of their friends, and their departure to another world. 
But at other times, Sheol was, as we have seen above, 
taken in a wider sense than that of grave merely ; it de- 
signated the ivorld of the dead, the region of CPttDI , i. e. 
of umbrae or ghosts. It was considered as a vast and wide 
domain or region, of which the grave seems to have been 
as it were only a part, or a kind of entrance way. It ap- 
pears to have been regarded as extending deep down in 
the earth, even to its lowest abysses. This was not un- 
natural. In the present life, men inhabit a region over 
which the air, b^3|t8 , extends indefinitely. Imagination 
formed something like this, for those who were placed 
in the sepulchre. A region deep and wide existed all 
around them. In this boundless region lived, and moved 
(at times), the Manes of departed friends. To this they 
assigned many qualities or attributes, some of which will 
now be briefly noticed. 

(1) Sheol is a place from which none ever return. 

So Job 7: 9, As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth 
away, so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up 
no more. He shall return no more to his house, neither 
shall his place know him any more. 2 Sam. 12: 23, 



§5. Popular views of Y^p. 117 

Now he is dead, wherefore should I fast ? Can I bring 
him back again ? I shall go to him, but he shall not re- 
turn to me. 

(2) It devours or consumes the bodies laid in it. 

Job 24: 19, Drought and heat consume the snow wa- 
ters : so doth the grave those who have sinned. Ps. 49: 

14, Like sheep they are laid in the grave ; death shall 
feed on them .... their beauty shall consume in the 
grave. 

(3) Sheol is a place of inaction and silence. 
Occasionally this idea is departed from, e. g. Is. 14: 

9, and in some other places. The amount of it seems to 
be, that in general Sheol is represented as a place of en- 
tire inactivity and silence ; e. g. 

Ps. 6: 6, In death there is no remembrance of thee ; 
in the grave, who shall give thee thanks? Ps. 31: 17 
(18), Let them be silent in the grave. 1 Sam. 2: 9, The 
wicked shall be silent in darkness. Ps. 115: 17, The 
dead praise not the Lord ; neither any that go down into 
silence. Is. 38: 18, For the grave cannot praise thee ; 
death cannot celebrate thee. Ecc. 9: 10, For there is no 
work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the 
grave whither thou goest. 

(4) Sheol extends deep into the recesses of the earth ; 
yea, as deep as the heavens are high above it. 

Job 11: 8, It is high as heaven, what canst thou do ? 
Deeper than Sheol, what canst thou know? Ezek. 31: 

15, Thus saith the Lord God, In the day when he [the 
king of Egypt] went down to Sheol, I caused a mourn- 
ing, I made the abyss to cover him ; i. e. Sheol was be- 
low the abyss of the ocean. So Jonah 2: 2. (3), out of 
the belly of Shoel did I cry unto thee ; i. e. from the 

11* 



118 §5. Popular views of\r\HC& » 

deep abysses of the sea, (while in the belly of the whale), 
did I cry unto thee. 

Sheol is the common antithesis of fEri) , heaven. 
Amos 9: 2, Though they dig into Sheol, thence shall my 
hand take them ; though they climb up to heaven, thence 
will I bring them down. Deut. 32; 22, A fire is kindled 
in mine anger, which shall burn to the lowest Sheol. Ps. 
139: 8, If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there ; if I 
make my bed in Sheol, behold thou art there. 

(5) Sheol is a place of utter and perpetual darkness 
and gloom. 

Job 10: 21, 22, Before I go whence I shall not return ; 
even to the land of darkness and the shadow of death ; 
a land of darkness, as darkness itself, and of the shadow 
of death, without any order ; where even the light is 
darkness ; i. e. where even the day is like our mid-night. 
The vivid nature of the imagery is very striking. 

(6) Here dwell the ghosts or Manes of deceased men. 
Ps. 88: 10 (11), Wilt thou shew wonders to the 

dead ? Shall the Manes, E\S£n , arise and praise thee ? 
i. e. shall the ghosts from the under-world rise up to life, 
and praise thee ? Prov. 2: 18, For her house inclineth 
unto death ; and her paths unto the ghosts, fi^s*^ ; i. e. 
the place where the ghosts dwell. Prov. 9: 18, He know- 
eth not that the ghosts, S\\£n , are there ; and that her 
guests are in the depths of Sheol. Prov. 21: 16, The 
man that wandereth out of the way of understanding, shall 
remain in the congregation of ghosts, tn&®*7j . Is. 14: 9, 
Sheol from beneath is moved, to meet thee at thy coming ; 
it stirreth up the ghosts for thee, ^b fiflSISH « 

That tTWDn designates deceased persons, is perfectly 
clear, not only from the texts just cited, but from the fol- 
lowing passages : viz. Is. 26: 14, They are dead, they 



§ 5. Popular views of^StSpti • 119 

shall not live, they are ghosts, Manes, [i. e. in a state of 
decease, having a post mortem existence], they shall not 
rise. Is. 26: 19, Thy dead men shall live ; . . » . the 
earth shall cast out her ghosts, d**85n. 

The state of the Manes is strongly characterized by 
the Hebrew name given to them, viz. KPfiljP'l , the plural 
of &En — inDI , which means weak, feeble, powerless ; an 
idea almost of course connected with the impression 
which the mind receives, from examining the powerless 
state of dead bodies. Accordingly, in Is. 14: 10, the 
ghosts of Sheol are represented as saying to the King of 
Babylon, as he comes down to them, " Art thou too be- 
come weak (rP£fr) like us?" 

These passages shew, very clearly, a strong resem- 
blance in the popular ideas of Sheol among the Hebrews, 
to those of the Greeks and Romans in regard to Hades. 

(7) Sheol is sometimes personified, and represented 
as an insatiable monster, always devouring without re- 
morse or distinction ; e. g. 

Is. 5: 14, Therefore Sheol hath enlarged herself, and 
opened wide her mouth without measure. Prov. 27: 20, 
Sheol and destruction are never satisfied. Prov. 30: 15, 
16, Three things are never satisfied .... Sheol, the bar- 
ren womb, etc. Prov. 1: 12, Let us swallow them up 
alive, like Sheol. 

(8) Sheol, in common and popular language, is the 
world or region to which both the righteous and the 
wicked go after death. 

Thus Abraham was gathered to his people, Gen. 25: 
8 ; so also was Isaac, Gen. 35: 29 ; Jacob, Gen. 49: 29 ; 
Aaron, Num. 20: 26 ; Moses, Deut. 32: 50. The gen- 
eration contemporary with Joshua, were gathered to their 
fathers, Judg. 2: 10. 



120 § 6. Remarks on the popular views ef^lKp. 

In Gen. 37: 35, Jacob is represented as saying, " I 
will go down to Sheol, unto my son, mourning." David 
often prays to be delivered from Sheol; and often de- 
scribes the wicked as being sent to Sheol. The passages 
have all been repeated above ; and are too plain to need 
repetition here. 

I might add some other minute particulars, respect- 
ing the popular modes of representing Sheol or the region 
of the dead ; but these embrace the most important. On 
these I shall now subjoin a few remarks. 

§ 6. Remarks on the popular views of Sheol. 

First ; the popular representations of this nature, to 
which reference is so frequently made in Scriptures, are 
not the proper ground of estimating the knowledge or be- 
lief of enlightened Hebrews respecting a future state. 

It seems sufficiently plain, that as the Hebrews believ- 
ed God to be the rewarder of the righteous, and that he 
would inflict punishment on the wicked, they could not 
well suppose, that after death all would in every respect 
share one common lot. So Ps. 17: 15, As for me, I shall 
behold thy face in righteousness ; I shall be satisfied 
when I awake in thy likeness. Here the Psalmist refers 
to a distinction, to be made between himself and the 
prosperous wicked who have a full portion in the present 
world. Consequently the distinction is not in matters of 
worldly good ; but in something after the present life. 
So Ps. 16: 11, In thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy 
right hand are pleasures forevermore. 

If any one should wonder how the "representations of 
Sheol above noticed, should be made in the Scriptures ; 
let him well consider the nature of the popular methods 



§ 6. Remarks on the popular views qf^htitti. 121 

of represent at ion so often adopted there. In the Scrip- 
tures, the sun is represented as rising and setting ; as 
are also the moon arid stars. The earth is an extended 
plain. The heavens are a solid arch extended over the 
earth, embosoming the stores of water which supply the 
rain, and pouring down this through the windows in the 
vault above. All these and very many other things are re- 
presented simply as they present themselves to the eye. 
The sacred writers did not undertake to teach geography or 
astronomy. Whenever they have occasion to refer to any 
objects of this nature, they do it merely in the popular 
way. 

Suppose now that any one should undertake, on this 
account, to maintain that the earth is not a globe, and to 
deny the revolutions of it, or of the heavenly bodies ; and 
all this, on the authority of Scripture ? The times have 
been, we know, when this was done ; but we trust such 
times are passed away, no more to return. 

In the same manner would I reason, in regard to the 
popular representations of Sheol in the Bible. Many of 
these are strictly correct ; as any one may see, by review- 
ing the particulars above described. But others have no 
foundation in point of fact. A deep region beneath, 
peopled with ghosts, is what we do not believe in. 

Nor is there any more certainty that it is true, be- 
cause this method of speaking about it in the Scriptures 
is adopted, than that the sun goes round the earth, be- 
cause they speak of it as doing so. 

In most cases, it is the language of poetry which em- 
ploys the popular methods of representation. It is poe- 
try which gives a kind of life and animation to the inhab- 
itants of the under-world. Poetry personifies that world. 
So in Is. 5: 14, Prow 27: 20. 30: 15, 16 and 1: 12. 



122 § 6. Remarks on the popular views of ilft'vp. 

Above all is this the case, in that most striking passage 
in Is. 14: 9- — 20 ; in which all commentators are com- 
pelled to admit a fictitious or imaginary costume. Here 
the ghosts rise up from their places of repose, and meet 
and insult the king of Babylon, and exult over his fall. 
All is life and animation, when he goes down into the 
under-world. 

Yet who was ever misled by this passage, and indu- 
ced to regard it as a passage to be literally understood ? 
But if this be very plain, then are other passages of a 
nature in any respect similar, equally plain also. To 
construe them literally, and then to build on them argu- 
ments, in order to shew that the Hebrews had no more 
definite views of a future world or of retribution than the 
heathen, is greatly to abuse the obvious principles of in- 
terpretation. 

Secondly ; another remark which I cannot forbear to 
to make is, that to represent the Old Testament as deter- 
mining the future state, either of the righteous or of the 
wicked, with the same clearness and fulness as the New 
Testament does, savours either of prejudice, or of an im- 
perfect acquaintance with the Jewish sacred Records. 
Where is the specific difference between the future state 
of the righteous and the wicked, fully set forth in the 
Hebrew Scriptures ? Where are the separate abodes in 
Sheol for each, particularly described? I know not; 
nor do I believe any one can inform me. 

In the New Testament all is clear. " Life and im- 
mortality are brought to light by the gospel." 

It would be a subject of curious and interesting in- 
quiry here, to pursue the comparison of the popular no- 
tions of the Hebrews respecting Sheol, with those of the 
Greeks as exhibited in the Odyssey, and those of the 



§ 6. General Conclusion. 123 

Romans as exhibited in the iEneid. Many striking traits 
of resemblance could easily be pointed out. But it would 
lead me too far from my present object, to pursue such a 
course at length ; and I must relinquish it to those, who 
have more leisure for such an undertaking. In the mean 
time, it is proper to suggest here, that in the view which 
is to be taken of Hades in the subsequent pages, the gen- 
eral ideas of the Greeks and Romans relative to the under- 
world, must necessarily be laid before the reader. 

§ 7. General Conclusion. 

As has been already intimated above, this is, that 
while the Old Testament employs SHEOL, in most 

CASES, TO DESIGNATE THE GRAVE, THE REGION OF THE 
DEAD, THE PLACE OF DEPARTED SPIRITS, IT EMPLOYS IT 
ALSO, IN SOME CASES, TO DESIGNATE ALONG WITH THIS 
IDEA, THE ADJUNCT ONE OF PLACE OF MISERY, PLACE OF 

punishment, region of woe. In this respect it accords, 
as we shall hereafter see, fully with the New Testament 
use of Hades. 

That neither the place of punishment nor of happiness, 
after death, is as fully and plainly developed in the Old 
Testament as in the New, will not be called in question 
by any candid and intelligent reader of the Bible. But 
that the people of God, in ancient times, had no ideas of 
future happiness or misery, and no words by which these 
ideas were conveyed, can he shewn only when it is prov- 
ed, that those who enjoyed a revelation from heaven, 
were more ignorant than their heathen neighbors. 



'AUHZov AIJHX 



§ 1. Classical sense of the word. 

Homer employs this word, throughout his poems, as 
the proper name of Pluto, the imaginary god of the un- 
der-world, among the Greeks and Romans. Later wri- 
ters, both in poetry and prose, employ it likewise to desig- 
nate the region, place, state, or condition of the dead ; 
the world beneath or under-world; the grave, death or 
the state of death. As an example of this last meaning, 
(the only one about which a classical reader will have any 
doubt), may be cited the phrases, adrjg ttovtioq, death 
by the sea, adrjg cpovtog, death by murder. The phrase 
eig (iv) * Al'duo or AWov, also elg (eg) * A'idao and AYdov, 
often occurs ; but it is elliptical in the Greek, and stands 
for iv Aidov owoo and eig Al'dov omov, viz. the house or 
residence of Pluto. 

In the oldest Greek writers, w r e find Hades distin- 
guished from Erebus and Cimmeria. Cimmeria or Cim- 
merium, was an imaginary place, near the island of Aeea, 
which island lay off the western coast of Sicily, and was 
the fabled abode of Circe and her companions, among 
whom Ulysses and his friends dwelt for some time on his 
return from Troy. Homer represents Ulysses as setting 
out from Aeea, and after one day's sail, as arriving at 



§2> Meaning of A'id)]q. 125 

Cimmeria, on " the extremity of the fathomless Ocean," 
Odyss. XL 13. Here they found regions, 

*HIql nctl vtqsXy Key.a\vn[itvot,' ovdi not aviovg 
'ifefooQ qatdojv imdtQY.ezai ctxrlveooiv, 
Ov& OTior civ orer/tioi ngog ovoavov aOTegotvrcc, 
Ov& brav dip inl yalav an ovpavo&ep nQOTQcmtjiat' 
AlX int [vv'§ oXori Ttiaiao dedoloi figoroToc 
that is, " Covered with darkness and clouds ; nor does 
the sun shining with his beams ever look upon them, 
neither when he mounts the starry sky, nor when he 
retires back from heaven to the earth ; but deadly night 
broods over wretched mortals," Odyss. XL 1G — 19. 

In this Cimmerian region, (which Pliny places near to 
the Lucrine Lake and Avernus), Ulysses is represented 
by the poet, as performing the sacred rites which evoked 
the Manes of the dead from Hades, who appeared before 
him, and successively conversed with him. Once, in- 
deed, Odyss. XL 474, Homer seems to represent Ulysses 
as having gone down into Hades ; for the shade of Achil- 
les asks him, " Why hast thou dared to come down into 
Hades'?" But still, the picture in general is such, that 
we are compelled to understand this, as meaning the pre- 
cincts of Hades ; for Proserpine and Pluto are represent- 
ed as sending the Manes from their abode to converse 
with Ulysses ; and Hercules, after conversing with him, is 
represented as " returning again to the house of Pluto," 
Odyss. XL 626. 

Between this embouchure of Hades, (which seems to 
have been considered as a deep valley or cavity where no 
light ever comes, but still on the surface of the earth), 
there lay another region of more intense gloom and 
darkness, which the Greeks called "jEQtfioq, (comp. the 
Hebrew yns> , night, darkness). This was not, as some 
12 



126 § 2. Meaning of A'tdriQ- 

of our lexicons represent it, the abode of departed souls ; 
but was only an intermediate region, under the surface 
of the earth, and lying between this and Hades, which 
was placed deeper down. Erebus is only a place of 
transition to Hades, from which Homer expressly distin- 
guishes it, II. VIII. 368. 

Last and lowest of all, was Hades, which is subdivided 
into the upper and lower. In the upper part are the Ely- 
sian fields, the abode of the good ; and beneath these, 
i. e. in the deepest dungeon, in the bowels of the earth, 
is TaQTUQog, the place of punishment for the wicked, an- 
swering, in some respects, to the Tiivva of the Hebrews. 
Later Greek writers do not always observe the distinc- 
tions which are here presented, but frequently confound 
more or less of them in a good degree ; as do also the 
Latin writers. T 

Virgil in his ^Eneid, book VI., has given a vivid pic- 
ture of Orcus or Hades. It is more adapted, however, to 
convey the fancies of his poetic imagination, than it is to 
convey an exact idea of the more ancient and general 
opinions of the Greeks in respect to Hades. He loses 
sight in some measure of the views of Homer, and is 
more intent on making out a striking picture, than on 
giving an exact account of tradition. 

Such is the classical view of Hades and its precincts. 
As to the state of the Manes or Umbrae who dwelt in 
Hades, it may be represented by a few words. 

When the shade of Achilles meets Ulysses, at the 
mouth of Hades, he addresses him thus ; " Noble son of 
Laertes, wily Ulysses, undaunted ! What deeds still great- 
er are you devising in your mind ? How is it that you 
have dared to come down to Hades, where the dead dwell 
who are incapable of forming any plans, the mere resem- 
blances of busy mortals 1 Odyss. XI. 472 — 475. 



§ 2. Meaning of Alfyq. 127 

The words tv&a ts vexpol dygadeeg valovoi, Cowper 

has translated, 

Where the shadows of the dead, 

Forms without intellect alone reside. 

But he has overlooked the antithesis lying in dqgadug, 
incapable of forming or of devising and executing plans. 
The idea thus conveyed, is directly the opposite of what 
Ulysses was doing, and to which Achilles adverts when 
he asks, " What deeds still greater are you devising in 
your mind?" The Manes are affirmed by him to be in- 
capable of devising and executing any thing of this na- 
ture. 

To men who placed the greatest happiness of life in 
action, as did the ancient Greeks, this would present a 
gloomy picture indeed of the state of souls in Hades. 

Ulysses in his reply to Achilles, seeks to comfort him 
by reminding him of his former greatness. To all this, 
the gloomy chief replies ; 

Renown'd Ulysses ! think not death a theme 
Of consolation ; I had rather live 
The servile hind for hire, and eat the bread 
Of some man scantily himself sustained, 
Than sovereign empire hold o'er all the shades. 

Cowper's Odyss. XL 572 — 597, Greek Original, XI. 

487—490. 

To the mind of a Greek, this must be a picture of 
consummate wretchedness. 

The picture which Virgil gives, is not less appalling. 
He describes the Manes and the entrance to their habita- 
tion, as 

" umbrae silentes; 

loca nocte tacentia late ; 

res alta terra et caligine mersas ; 

primisque in faucibus Orci, 

Luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Cura? ; 
Pallentesque habitant Morbi, tristisque Senectus, 



128 § 2. Meaning of AWriq. 

Et Metus, etmalesuada Fames, ac turpis Egestas, 
Terribiles visu formae ; Letumque, Labosque ; 
Turn consanguineus Leti Sopor, et mala mentis 
Gaudia, mortiferumque adverso in limine Bellum 
Ferreique Eumenidnm thalami, et Discordia demens, 
Vipereum crinem vittis in excruentis." 

iEneid, VI. 263—280. 

Afterwards (VI. 425 seq.) Virgil describes the pro- 
gress of Eneas in the region of Hades, in terms which 
shew what a doleful place he thought it to be. However, 
when he brings his hero to Elysium, to the locos laetos i 
et amoena vireta, sedesque beatas (VI. 637 seq.), he seems 
to make something more substantial out of them, than 
can be found in any of the preceding heathen writers. 
But it is plainly the fancy of the poet which does this, 
and not the tradition of the Greek and Roman nations. 

Hades, then, in the view of the Greeks and Romans, 
was the under-ivorld, the world of the dead 9 a place deep 
in the earth, dark, cheerless ; where every thing was un- 
substantial and shadowy. The Manes were neither body 
nor spirit ; but something intermediate, not palpable to 
any of the senses, except to the sight and hearing : pur- 
suing the mere shadows of their occupations on earth 
and incapable of any plans, enjoyments, or satisfaction 
which were substantial. Of the Elysium of Virgil, Ho> 
mer knows little or nothing ; and it is sufficiently plain 
that it is principally the offspring of his own imagination 

§ 2. Sense of ^dYdiqg as used by the sacred ivriters, 

Before the New Testament was written, the transla- 
tors of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, i. e. the Seven- 
ty as they are usually called, had made very frequent use 
of the word adrjg, in order to translate bl$3? , They 
have done this in no less than 60 instances, out of the 63 



§ 2. Meaning of Atit]g. 129 

in which the word MwJ is employed in the Hebrew or-, 
iginal. Twice they have rendered the same Hebrew 
word by ftavuxog, viz. 2 Sam. 22: 6. Prov. 23: 14 ; and 
once by (56&Qog,pit, Ezek. 32: 19 (21). 

That they employ the same word (adr^g) in a few oth- 
er cases, is also true. Once they employ it to translate 
^il ^pjntt , stones of the pit, tomb, grave, Is. 14: 19 ; 
twice, to translate TV2M , silence, viz. Ps. 93: 17. 113: 
26; and once, to translate njfcirS, death- shade, umbra 
mortis, Job 38: 18. 

In Is. 38: 18, nii "H^V*, the descenders into the pit, 
is rendered ol h adov. In Prov. 14: 12 and 16: 25, 
DTQ ">3""n, the ways of death, is rendered elg nv^^avu 
fldov, into the depths of Hades. 

These are all the instances in which it occurs in the 
Septuagint Version. The sense which these translators 
affixed to it, is most evidently the same as the Hebrews 
affixed to the word bltttp . For this, I must remit the 
reader to the preceding dissertation, where it has been 
amply discussed. 

In the Apocrypha, I find the word employed 16 times ; 
and in all cases in a manner that corresponds entirely 
with the use of bi&U? . 

We are prepared then to expect the like use of ad^g 
in the New Testament. Accordingly, we here find it 
sometimes employed in almost or quite a literal sense, 
i. e. as meaning world beneath, under-world ; sometimes 
in a sense similar to that of Orcus or Tnfernus, i. e. the 
place of departed souls ; and sometimes in the sense of 
kingdom or region of the dead, like bW^S in Is. 14: 9 
and other passages. 

12* 



130 §2. Meaning of AiStjg, 



1. AWr t g designates the under-world, subterranean 
regions simply, in opposition to the regions above the 
earth. E. g. 

Matt. 11: 23, Thou, Capernaum, which art exalted 
i'coQ rou ovQavov, to heaven, i. e. very highly, (alluding 
probably to its site on a lofty hill), shalt be brought down 
etoQ adov, to the under-world, i. e. very low. I admit that 
the sense is probably a spiritual one here, i. e. that the 
Saviour means to say, that Capernaum, which had been 
so greatly exalted in point of privileges and had so sig- 
nally abused them, should be made a conspicuous monu- 
ment of punitive justice. But still, the source of the 
imagery, and the natural and primary explanation of the 
words, are not affected by this. 

Luke 10: 15, the same words, in the same sense. 



(2) AWr\q signifies, the region of the dead, the domains 
of death, or of [him who hath the power of death] Satan. 

Thus Matt. 16: 18, Peter is called a rock : and on 
this rock the church is to be built ; " %al nvlai adov, 
and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." The 
world of the dead was supposed, both by the Hebrews 
and Greeks, to have bars or gates which none could 
open, i. e. which were strong or invincible. The reason 
or ground of this figure, v/as, that no one ever returned 
from MfiTO or adyg, who once went there. The phrase 
TivXat adov may be found in 3 Mace. 5: 51 ; and nvlat 
Vavaxov, m» VWtJ, in Ps. 9: 13. 107: 18. Is. 38: 10. 
The heathen writers also employ the like phrase ; e. g. 
Euripides, Alcest. 124 ; ^Eschylus, Agamemn. 1300 ; 
Lucretius, III. 7. These gates, moreover, are represent- 



§ 2. Meaning of Aidqg. 131 

ed by them as most firm and well guarded, Iliad, IX. 
312. Odyss. XL 276 ; comp. Job 38: 17. 

The meaning of the phrase in question, then, seems 
to be ; ' the empire of death shall never prevail over the 
church,' i. e. the church shall never cease or be extin- 
guished. That gates of Hades stands, by synecdoche, 
for the region or empire of Hades, is only a common case 
of rhetorical usage. Strong and invincible as Hades is, 
it is not to prevail over the church. This will ever live 
and flourish ; or, it will never die. 

As an illustration of the idea of strength, to which 
allusion is made in the word Hades, one may quote the 
noted line in Petronius, Sat. 62, 

" Ecce autem miles, fortis tanquam Orcus." 

In the Apocalypse, the imagery is more specific with 
regard to Hades, The writer of this book not only re- 
presents Hades as the region or kingdom of the dead, but 
also represents Death, ftavaxoq, as being Icing over this 
region, and directing and controlling those who dwell in 
it. Of this tenor are all the examples of the use of ad?jg 
in this book ; e. g. 

Rev. 1: 18, I have the keys of death and Hades, xov 
tfcivuzov Xtxl tov adov. The meaning of this is render- 
ed plain, by the context which immediately precedes. 
The Saviour says, " I live, but was dead ; yea, behold ! 
I live forever and ever ; for I have the keys of death and 
Hades ;" i. e. mine is the power to unlock the gates of 
Hades, to open the doors of this prison from which none 
could escape. I have entered the region of Hades, 
(comp. Acts 2: 17, 31), and am come forth living; yea, 
in possession of everlasting life. 

When God addresses Job, and asks, " Have the gates 
of death been opened to thee ? Job 38: 17, the question 



132 §2. Meaning of ^ti'tyg. 

implies the utter impossibility that any merely mortal 
power should open them. And when Jesus is represent- 
ed as " having the keys of death and Hades/ 5 he is, of 
course, presented as clothed with power which nothing 
can control or resist. A special reference, however, is 
made in this language, to the fact that Jesus had died 
and risen again ; as ha says in John 10: 18, " I have 
power to lay down my life, and I have power to resume 
it." 

Death, which in this passage is tacitly represented as 
the monarch of Hades, is fully exhibited as such, in oth- 
er passages of the Apocalypse ; e. g. 

Rev. 6: 8, Lo ! a pale horse, and he who sat upon 
him was named Death, and Hades followed after him. 
Here is the king of the empire of the dead, with his sub- 
jects in his train. They are a part of the fearful battle- 
array which the opening of the seven seals summons to- 
gether, and puts in readiness to fight " the great battle 
of God Almighty." Hades, in this passage, stands for 
the inhabitants of Hades ; just as in innumerable cases, 
we employ the name of a country in order to designate 
the inhabitants of the same. 

It would be turning aside from my present purpose, 
to descant on the magnificent and appalling scenery pre- 
sented in Rev. vn. If any one can read this chapter, 
without being deeply impressed and affected with the 
vivid and powerful imagination of the writer, he is a very 
unfit person to be a commentator on this book. 

Rev. 20: 13, Death and Hades gave up the dead 
which were in them ; i. e. the king over the region of the 
dead, and his empire also, gave up the dead who were 
under his control or within its boundaries. The mean- 
ing of the writer is, that all the dead were raised to life, 



§2. Meaning of AWi]Q. 133 

and summoned to appear before the tribunal of the su- 
preme Judge of the universe. 

Rev. 20: 14, and Death and Hades , were cast into 
the lake of fire ; this is the second death. Here the king 
of Hades, and Hades itself, i. e. the region or domains of 
death, are represented as cast into the burning lake. 
The general judgment being now come, mortality having 
now been brought to a close, the tyrant death, and his 
domains along with him, are represented as cast into the 
burning lake, as objects of abhorrence and of indignation. 
They are no more to exercise any power over the human 
race. 

Such is the representation of Hades in the Apoca- 
lypse. It is the genuine bittti) of the Hebrews ; with the 
exception, perhaps, that the Hebrew sacred books have 
no where represented Hades as having a king over it. 
The passage in Is. 28: 15, is indeed susceptible of being 
understood so as to accord exactly with the representa- 
tion in the Apocalypse ; " We have made a covenant with 
Death (rnfcj) ; and with Sheol, (bltttti , Hades), are we 
at agreement ;" comp. Hos. 13: 14. But the want of sup- 
port from analogy in the Old Testament, leads me to con- 
strue Sheol here, as meaning simply grave or region of 
the dead, and as being merely a parallelism of death, 



(3) Very nearly allied to No. 2, and a species of the 
game genus, is the meaning, grave, sepulchre, depository 
of the dead, which adrjg sometimes has. 

1 Cor. 15: 55, O grave ! adyg, where is thy victory ? 
So our common version here ; and well enough, because 
the question which the writer puts, has respect to the 



134 §2. Meaning of ^l'3 V g. 

resurrection of the dead. Still, if the passage " O 
death ! where is thy sting ? O grave ! where is thy vic- 
tory/ 5 should be construed in such a manner as <&dvurog 
and adrjQ are to be construed throughout the Apocalypse, 
the sense would be perfectly good ; e. g. ' King of ter- 
rors ! where is thy triumph ? Empire of the dead ! 
where is thy victory V 

Acts 2: 27, thou wilt not leave my soul [me] in 
Hades ; nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption ; i. e. 
thou wilt not leave me in the grave or region of the dead, 
nor suffer my body to putrify there. See on bitt'^ above, 
under Ps. 16: 10. 

Acts 2: 31, his soul [he] was not left in Hades, nor 
did his flesh see corruption. 

Both these passages have their basis in Ps. 16: 10 ; 
and Hades here, evidently has the same sense as ?1OT3 
there. 



(4) Hades has the sense of Tartarus, in one passage, 
viz. the region of woe or punishment. 

Luke 16: 23, in Hades, iv tco ady he lifted up his 
eyes, being in torments. That in the heathen Hades 
was a Tartarus, a place of punishment and suffering, is 
too well known to need illustration and proof on the pre- 
sent occasion. More will be said on this point, when I 
come to treat of TaQxaQoq. That in Hades, bTtf^ , ac- 
cording to the views of the Hebrews, and of Jesus him- 
self, there was a place of torment, is put out of all ques- 
tion by the passage now before us. 

Taking this to be correct, we may now look back and 
see, that the remarks made above on the probable mean- 
ing of Sheol under §§ 3, 4, receive much confirmation, 
and are rendered very probable, by the passage before us. 



§ 3. Remarks on Jl'id^g. 135 



§ 3. Remarks on the use of Hades in the Scriptures. 

These are all the passages in which Hades is employ- 
ed in the New Testament. From none of these can we 
gather, that the Jews in our Saviour's time made use of 
the word Hades as indicating expressly the abode of the 
righteous, as well as of the wicked. The passage in 
Rev. 20: 13, 14, may appear somewhat dubious, however, 
in respect to this point ; and the passage in 1 Cor. 15: 
55, implies a triumph of the righteous, at their resurrec- 
tion, over Hades ; which would seem to imply, that for a 
time they had been subjected to its dominion. This do- 
minion, however, need not be interpreted as meaning any 
thing more, than that they have been subjected to mor- 
tality, i. e. to death. 

It may also be remarked, that as in the Old Testa- 
ment, Sheol is the place to which the righteous go as 
well as the wicked ; and as the Saviour, subsequently to 
his death, is represented as being in Hades, Ps. 16: 10. 
Acts 2: 27, 31 ; so it is not improbable that the general 
conception of Hades, as meaning the region of the dead, 
comprized both an Elysium and a Tartarus, (to speak in 
classical language), or a state of happiness and a state of 
misery. 

Such being the case, the question whether those who 
go to Hades will be happy or miserable there, depends of 
course on the question, whether they are righteous or 
wicked, whether they deserve reward or punishment. 
Admitting that an existence in Hades implies a state 
which is capable either of happiness or of misery, is ad- 
mitting, of course, that the sinner may be " in torments" 
while in Hades ; and that Dives was in such a state, is 
made certain by Luke 16: 23. 



136 § 3. Remarks on ^4tdtjg. 

That the Hebrews used the Greek word Hades, so 
as to correspond in general with their Sheol, is quite 
plain from the above investigations. We can no more 
argue that Hades, as used by them, did in all respects 
mean the same as it did among the Greeks, than we can 
argue in like manner in regard to the use of the words 
fteog, ayyelog, gwtiiq, dalpoov, dtapolog, ovguvog, etc. 
A most important philological consideration ; and one, I 
may add, which is very often overlooked in the partial 
and party examinations to which the Scriptures are not 
unfrequently subjected ! 

I add one more remark, before closing this topic. 
Whatever the state of either the righteous or the wicked 
may be, whilst in Hades, i. e. under the dominion of 
death, that state will certainly cease, and be exchanged 
for another, at the general resurrection. So we are most 
plainly taught, in Rev. 20: 13, 14. The wicked will 
then be doomed to a second death, more dreadful than the 
first, Rev. 21: 8, 9, comp. Rev. 20: 8, 9, also Rev. 20: 
14, 15. 

I am entirely unable, then, to perceive how it can 
be proved that there will be no future punishment, by 
shewing that Hades means the grave, the region of the 
dead, or the state of the dead, the empire of death. This 
empire is to cease, and another state is to succeed, from 
which the Scriptures say nothing (at least I am able to 
find nothing) in regard to deliverance. When it can be 
shewn, that there is deliverance from " the lake of fire, 
which is the second death," then something will be done to 
affect the question under consideration. Until then, I see 
not how we can avoid the conclusion, that " the smoke of 
future torment will ascend up forever and ever" 



TAP TAP OS. 



The name Tartarus occurs no where in the Scrip- 
tures. But a denominative verb, Tag-caQoa), which means 
to send to Tartarus, to confine in Tartarus, to 'punish in 
Tartarus, occurs in 2 Pet. 2: 4. Here it is said, that 
" God spared not the angels who sinned, but tuqtoiqw- 
Gag, confining them in Tartarus, he put them in chains of 
darkness, incarcerated for trial or kept for judgment. 

That a place of punishment is here indicated by Tar- 
tarus, is put beyond all doubt by the context ; " he spar- 
ed not," " chains of darkness," " imprisoned for judg- 
ment or condemnation." It remains only to inquire, 
whether the word is susceptible of any other meaning, 
even according to the usus loquendi of the classics. 

In Greek, the word Tartarus is employed to desig- 
nate a supposed subterranean region, as deep down be- 
low the upper part of Hades as the earth is distant from 
heaven ; Passow, Lex. sub voc. Tapiccgog. It is occa- 
sionally employed, in the later classic writers, for the un- 
der-world in general ; but in such a connection as to 
shew, that it is only when writers mean to speak of the 
whole as a region of gloom, that they call it Tartarus. 
It is the place where the distinguished objects of Jupi- 
ter's vengeance are represented as being confined and 

13 



138 Meaning of Tagragoi. 

tormented. It is placed in opposition to, or in distinc- 
tion from Elysium. 

These meanings of the word are so notorious, and so 
familiar to every reader of the classics, that I deem it un- 
important to dwell upon them. I add only, that Homer, 
Iliad IV. 13, uses the expression elg rccgragov ginroj, 
which is equivalent to ragiagoo) ; Josephus, cont. Apion. 
2: 33, uses the expression, lv ragrccgco dedii t utvovg. 
KaraTagragoa) is also employed by Sextus Empir., 
Hypotyp. III. 24; and by Apollodorus, Biblioth. I. 1, 2. 
There can be no doubt, then, either from classical 
or sacred usage, of the proper meaning of Tagragwaccg. 
The only question is, to whom does it refer ? 

The answer must be, ' Primarily to the sinning an- 
gels.' So 2 Pet. 2: 4 shews beyond a doubt. But then 
the nature of the threatening here is such, that it must 
be intended for sinful men as w r ell as angels. So v. 3 
clearly shews. The whole strain of the argument is : 
c If God spared not the angels who sinned, but confined 
them in Tartarus ; neither will he spare sinners now, but 
will confine them there.' If we compare vs. 3, 4 and 
17, in chap. II., this conclusion is put beyond any rea- 
sonable doubt. 

I remark, moreover, that the heathen had no appre- 
hension of deliverance from Tartarus. Tantalus, Sisy- 
phus, Ixion, and all others sent there, were doomed to 
endless punishment, in the view of the Greeks and Ro- 
mans. It remains for those who deny that the idea of such 
a punishment was attached to the word Tartarus, when 
it was used by the Hebrews, to exhibit some proof that 
the allegation which they make is true. 

But they will tell us, perhaps, that ' the word Tarta- 
rus designates nothing more than an imaginary place of 






Meaning of Tagxagog. 139 

punishment, among the heathen. Such a place as the 
Greeks and Romans supposed, does not in fact exist ; 
therefore we are not to conclude, when the word is em- 
ployed by Peter, that it designates any place which has 
a real existence.' 

The answer to this is easy. We may allow the pre- 
mises, without in any measure feeling ourselves moved 
to allow the conclusion. Did not the Greek fcog, desig- 
nate an imaginary god ? Was not his ovgavog, and his 
Tilv o to v (Elysium) imaginary ? And yet, when a He- 
brew writer employs deog and ovoavog, does it designate 
nothing real, and nothing different from the idea that a 
heathen Greek expressed by these words ? Surely such 
an argument as this, can never stand before the light of 
examination. Have we yet to learn, after so many able 
lexicons and commentaries on the New Testament Greek 
have been published, that when the Hebrews employed 
the words of this language, they attached to very many 
of them peculiarities of meaning, which may be sought 
for in vain in classic authors ? Who that is worthy of re- 
gard as a scholar, now calls this in question 1 And if it 
be true, is there any difficulty in supposing that zagTagoj- 
cag has a real meaning, when used by Peter ? Certain- 
ly none. Tndeed, the connection in which it stands, puts 
this matter beyond fair question. Peter was obliged, 
when he wrote Greek, to use the language as he found 
it already made. What term then, in order to express 
the horrors of future punishment, could he select from the 
whole Greek language, which was more significant than 
ragragojoag ? Until this question can be answered, I 
know not how to avoid the conclusion here, that the apos- 
tle does refer to a future and an endless punishment. 



FEENNJ. 



The word Tievva is derived, as all agree, from the 
Hebrew words uiT] %; which, in process of time, pas- 
sing into other languages, assumed diverse forms ; e. g. 

*£' ' 
Chaldee SSrr-i , Arabic p^Q-r** (Gahannam), Greek Fi- 
evvcc. 

The valley of Hinnom, D3!T7 ^ , is a part (the eastern 
section) of the pleasant Wadi or valley, which bounds 
Jerusalem on the south, Josh. 15: 8. 18: 6. Here, in an- 
cient times, and under some of the idolatrous kings, the 
worship of Moloch, the horrid idol-god of the Ammonites, 
was practiced. To this idol children were offered in 
sacrifice, 2 K. 23. 10. Ezek. 23: 37, 39. 2 Chron. 28: 3. 
Lev. 18: 21. 20: 2. If we may credit the Rabbins, the 
head of the idol was like that of an ox ; while the rest of 
its body resembled that of a man. It was hollow within ; 
and being heated by fire, children were laid in its arms 
and were there literally roasted alive. We cannot won- 
der, then, at the severe terms in which the worship of 
Moloch is every where denounced in the Scriptures. 
Nor can we wonder that the place itself should have 
been called Tophet, n£>n , i. e. abomination, detestation, 
(from spfi to vomit with loathing), Jer. 31: 32, 19: 0. 
2 K. 23: 10. Ezek. 23: 37, 39. 



Meaning of Itevvct. 141 

After these sacrifices had ceased, the place was de- 
secrated, and made one of loathing and horror. The 
pious king Josiah caused it to be polluted, 2 K. 23: 10, 
l e. he caused to be carried there the filth of the city of 
Jerusalem. It would seem that the custom of desecrat- 
ing this place, thus happily begun, was continued in after 
ages down to the period when our Saviour was on earth. 
Perpetual fires were kept up, in order to consume the of- 
fal which was deposited there. And as the same offal 
would breed worms, (for so all putrefying meat of course 
does), hence came the expression, " Where the worm 
dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." 

It is admitted, that the Jews of later date used the 
word Gehenna to denote Tartarus, i. e. the place of in- 
fernal punishment. The question here to be discussed 
is, whether this name is literally employed in the New 
Testament, or whether it designates a place of future 
punishment or the future world of woe. 

It is of some importance to this investigation, to in- 
quire whether the Jews were ever accustomed to execute 
malefactors by burning them. 

That such a mode of punishment was once practiced, 
and in certain cases even enjoined by the Mosaic law, is 
certain from Gen. 38: 24. Lev. 20: 14. 21: 9. Josh. 15: 
25. But that the Jews were accustomed to execute 
criminals in this way, in our Saviour's time, there is no 
certain proof. The allusion, however, in Matt. 5: 22, 
seems almost necessarily to imply that such was the fact* 

The word Tttvva, then, when used in respect to a 
place of punishment, may be used, or might have been 
used, literally. The question whether it is employed in 
its literal, or in its secondary and spiritual sense, in the 
New Testament, comes now to be examined. 
13* 



142 Meaning of Fievva. 

The only passage which seems to me even capable of 
the literal sense, is Matt. 5: 22. The Saviour here says, 
" Every one who is angry at his brother, is obnoxious xr] 
xol(J6i, ,} i. e. as it were, to a punishment inflicted by a low- 
er court, viz. that of the Septemviri among the Hebrews; 
u but whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be ob- 
noxious GvvsSglco," i. e. to the Sanhedrim (^"HnsD) or 
highest council, who could inflict severer punishment than 
the court of Septemviri, q. d. he will deserve still severer 
punishment than he who is merely angry ; " but he who 
shall say, fio)Qe\ shall be obnoxious elg tjjv Thvvav rov 
tivqos" i. e. lit. to the fire of the valley of Hinnom, q. d. 
to a still higher and more severe punishment, such as is 
inflicted by burning to death in the valley of Hinnom. 

Is all this literal, or spiritual? How can it be liter- 
al? Our Saviour had just said, that the Jews adjudged 
him only to be guilty of murder, who actually killed a 
man. He then declares, that in the sight of God, this 
whole matter appears in a very different light. It is not 
the external act only, which he regards. The spirit 
which is cherished and exhibited, constitutes an essential 
part of the crime, as it is viewed by him. Accordingly, 
he who cherishes an angry and revengeful spirit, is ex- 
posed to punishment ; he who lets this spirit break out 
into provoking and reproachful language, is more guilty 
still ; but he who gives loose to his passion, so as to ut- 
ter epithets of the highest reproach, such as would de- 
stroy the character or endanger the life of the person 
against whom they were uttered, — he should be deemed 
worthy of the most signal punishment of all, like that in- 
flicted in the valley of Hinnom. 

It must be very plain, now, to every considerate rea- 
der, that the Saviour, (who had just declared that the 



Meaning of IVevva. 143 

Jews regarded nothing to be hilling or murder except the 
external act, and who of course did not punish any thing 
else or take any cognizance of it), could not here mean 
to say, that the Jews would literally punish the various 
gradations of crime which he marks. This would be to 
contradict what he had just said. We must suppose, 
then, that he means to designate the punishment which 
God, who could judge the heart, would inflict, and which 
must be spiritual. Surely it cannot be meant, that God 
would subject persons who cherished anger, to a literal 
court of the Septemviri (xQtoig) ; or to the literal San- 
hedrim ; or to the literal fire in the valley of Hinnom. 
What is meant must then be, that God would punish, in 
a future world, with different degrees of severity which 
were signified or symbolized by the punishment inflicted 
by the Septemviri, by the Sanhedrim, and by being 
burned in the valley of Hinnom. It seems impossible to 
give the passage any other rational, defensible meaning. 

It follows, of course, that although Gehenna is here 
referred to in its literal sense, yet the meaning of the 
whole passage does not permit us to understand the idea 
intended to be conveyed as a literal one. It is employed 
as a source of imagery, to describe the punishment of a 
future world, which the Judge of all hearts and intentions 
will inflict. 

What has now been said will render the other exam- 
ples of Gehenna that follow, easy to be understood. 
Thus, 

Matt. 5: 29, the Saviour declares that ' he who does 
not " cut off" an offending member of his body, shall be 
cast into Gehenna.' Most certainly this cannot be under- 
stood of a literal casting into Gehenna ; for who was to 
execute such a punishment ? Not the Jewish courts ; 



1 44 Meaning of Fte vva. 

for they had no cognizance of the offence which a man's 
right hand or right eye moved him to commit, i. e. they 
could not call in question and punish a member of the 
human body, because it tempted its owner to sin. It 
must then be a punishment which God would inflict. 
But was this a literal casting into the valley of Hinnom ? 

It may however be said, that the caution of the Sa- 
viour runs thus ; e Avoid all temptation to sin, lest you 
bring on yourself the terrible punishment of being burn- 
ed in the valley of Hinnom, in case you give way to any 
temptation. ' 

This would be a possible interpretation, provided the 
crimes in question could be shewn to be of such a nature 
as were punishable in this manner by the Jewish courts. 
But as this cannot be done, this exegesis seems to be fair- 
ly incapable of admission. 

Matt. 5: 30, another example of the same nature as 
that in 5: 29. 

Matt. 18: 9, an instance of the same nature, except- 
ing that the phrase here is ynvvav rov irvQog, a fiery 
Gehenna; which one cannot doubt has the same meaning 
as unquenchable fire, Mark 9: 43, 45, inasmuch as this 
very phrase is there used to explain ye'evva ; the same 
meaning also as the lake of fire, Rev. 20: 14, 15. 21: 8, 
which is " the second death," Rev. 21: 9. 

Mark 9: 43. 9: 45, the like cases with Matt. 5: 29, 
and where in both instances, to uvq to uo^eozov, un- 
quenchable fire is added, in order to explain the tremen- 
dous nature of the Gehenna in question. 

Mark 9: 47, the same as Matt. 18: 9. 



Meaning of Titvv a. 145 



(2) There is a second class of cases, where Gehenna 
appears to be used more simply still, that is with imme- 
diate reference to the world of woe, or a state of punish' 
ment. E. g. 

Matt. 23: 15, the Scribes and Pharisees are said to 
compass sea and land, in order to make proselytes ; and 
when this is accomplished, the proselyte becomes "two 
fold more a son of Gehenna than themselves ;" i. e. he is 
doubly deserving of the punishment of hell. Surely the 
Saviour does not mean to say, that he will suffer double 
the punishment literally to be inflicted on them, in the 
literal valley of Hinnom. 

Matt. 23: 30, how can ye [Scribes and Pharisees] 
escape the damnation of Gehenna ? xqIosojq xr\q lee'v- 
vy]q\ Does the Saviour mean here to ask, ' How can ye 
escape being burned alive in the valley of Hinnom 1 
Were they in any danger of this ? 

James 3: 6, the tongue ... is set on fire of Gehenna , 
vno rrjg Fetvvriq. Does James mean to say, that a slan- 
derous boasting tongue is literally set on fire by the val- 
ley of Hinnom? Or does Gehenna here mean hell, 
which, like the name of a region or country, is used to 
denote those who dwell in it, viz. malignant spirits ? 



(3) There remain two examples more, which put the 
question out of all possible doubt in respect to a literal 
construction. 

Matt. 10: 28, fear not them who kill the body, but 
cannot kill the soul ; but rather fear him who can destroy 
both souland body in Gehenna. The body might, indeed, 



146 Meaning of Fuvva. 

be literally burned in the valley of Hinnom ; but the 
immaterial, immortal soul — is that to be literally burned 
there ? 

Luke 12: 5, fear him, who after killing hath power 
to cast into Gehenna ; a passage parallel with the one 
above, and of the same import. 

These are all the instances in which the word Gehen- 
na is employed by the sacred writers. It exists not 
among the Greek classic writers, because it is a mere 
Hebrew word. No light then can come from that quar- 
ter, in order to illustrate its meaning. 

That the word Gehenna was common among the 
Jews, is evinced by its frequency in the oldest Rabbini- 
cal writings. It was employed by them, as all confess, 
in order to designate hell, the infernal region, the world 
of woe. In no other sense, can it in any way be made 
out that it is employed in the New Testament. 

Now as all appellations to designate either heaven 
or hell, must be taken from sensible objects, (see on 
Sheol, §§ 3, 4), so there is not the least difficulty as to 
the usage in question. Heaven is called a paradise, 
Luke 23: 43. 2 Cor. 12: 2. Rev. 2: 7 ; although this 
word originally means, park, garden, pleasure garden, 
Cant. 4: 13. Neh. 2: 8. Ecc. 2: 5, and is of Persian or- 
igin. So hell may be called Gehenna, although the orig- 
inal sense of the word is only valley of Hinnom, What 
could be a more appropriate term than this, when we con- 
sider the horrid cruelties and diabolical rites which had 
been there performed 1 Indeed, it seems quite probable, 
as Gesenius suggests, that * Gehenna came to be used as 
a designation of the infernal regions, because the He- 
brews supposed that demons dwelt in this valley.' Hebrew 
Thesaurus, sub. voc. ft?2 . 



GENERAL REMARKS. 



And now, in view of the results which the whole of 
the preceding investigations afford, what says the under- 
standing ? What says conscience ? 

The question is not, what this or that individual may 
wish or desire to be true ; but, What have the sacred 
writers taught ? This latter question can be answered 
in no satisfactory way, but by inquiring what the lan- 
guage means, which they have employed. The mean- 
ing of this is surely to be made out by philology, i. e. by 
an investigation conducted agreeably to the principles of 
language ; not by philosophy , i. e. by a priori specula- 
tions about the nature of God's moral government. And 
even in this latter method, if analogy is of any force, the 
question must be decided in the affirmative with regard 
to future punishment. What earthly government ever 
existed, or can exist, without any punishments ? 

Is there, then, a moral government of God as a spir- 
itual being ? Is there another world, where moral be- 
ings are to be governed? If so, who can render it pro- 
bable, even by a priori argument, that there is no punish- 
ment there ? 

But our question is with the Bible. Does this reveal 
a place of future punishment? To say that this is absurd, 



148 General Remarks. 

or impossible, is only to prejudge the question without 
examining it. The results of a philological examination 
of the Scriptures, are, that a place of punishment after 
death is disclosed by the sacred writers, and by the Sa- 
viour of men. I am well aware that this is contradicted 
and denied. But then, neither contradiction nor denial, 
in this case, springs from philology, but from inclination, 
wishes, philosophy, or prejudice. If this be not so, why- 
is not philology arrayed, in all its proper strength, against 
the idea that there is a place of future punishment ? Who 
has done this? How is it to be done 1 All the exam- 
ples in the Scriptures, of the various words above exam- 
ined, are produced in these essays. There is no con- 
cealment. I trust there is no attempt to pervert or frit- 
ter away their obvious meaning. I am certain there is 
no such design, on my part. Let them be philologically 
and critically set aside, or shewn to be erroneously inter- 
preted, and, so far as I am concerned, I promise to in- 
stitute denovo another examination. 

I address those who acknowledge the Scriptures as 
the source of their faith ; and I put again the questions ; 
What says the understanding ? What says conscience ? 

If any one should reply, and say ; ' The words Sheol, 
Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna, all have a literal signifi- 
cation, and designate objects real or imaginary belonging 
only to the present world ;' the answer to this has already 
been given. It is simply this, viz. that all words which 
characterize a future world, are and must be of the like 
nature. They all originally have a literal sense. This 
they must have, else they could not be used in a figura- 
tive or secondary sense. The Hebrew tTft;i3 , heavens, 
has a literal sense ; and so also the Greek ovgavog ; both 
mean the airy region above the earth, the welkin above, 



General Remarks. 149 

the apparent expanse over our heads. But have they, 
therefore, no other sense ? Do they not often designate 
the place where God dwells, the abode of the blessed in 
a future world ? None will be so unreasonable as to de- 
ny this. 

Paradise, (Heb. DT1S , Greek iiuQadeHJog), has a 
literal sense, viz. that of garden, pleasure-garden, orchard 
of fruit and flower trees, etc. ; but has it always such a 
meaning ? When our Saviour tells the penitent thief, 
that he should be with him in paradise ; or when Paul 
was caught up into paradise ; or when the Saviour pro- 
mises to the Ephesian church, that he who overcomes 
shall eat of the tree of life in the paradise of God, is 
nothing but a literal garden meant? The most zealous 
advocates of benevolence and good-will (so called), would 
blush at such an interpretation as this. 

When the wicked, then, are represented as being sent 
to Sheol ; and the rich man as lifting up his eyes in 
Hades, being in torments; or the evil angels as being 
confined in chains of darkness in Tartarus ; is all this to 
be understood only of a literal grave, or sepulchre, or un- 
der-world ? And when we are commanded to fear him, 
who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna; is this 
destruction to be a literal one in the literal valley of Hin- 
nom ? Prejudice may possibly affirm this ; or unbelief 
may scoff at it, and refuse to examine it ; but the reason 
and conscience of any man, who really believes the di- 
vine word, will tremble to decide in so unreasonable and 
presumptuous a manner. 

I advance one step further. There is not only a place 
of future punishment, (just as surely as there is of future 
happiness, and on the like grounds), but that place is se- 
parated by an " impassable gulf" from the region of the 
14 



150 General Remarks. 

blessed. So the awful passage in Luke 16: 19 — 26 in- 
forms us. The words of this passage, be it remember- 
ed, are those of the Saviour, who know r s whether there is 
a hell as well as a heaven. They then that " would pass 
from the Hades of torments to the region of the blessed, 
can not." (Luke 16: 26.) There is no commutation of 
place for them. 

The force of all this may be denied ; attempts may 
be made to fritter it away ; they have been. There is 
no difficulty in all this. But how the impassable gulf 
fixed between heaven and hell by an almighty God, is 
to be removed, or rendered passable; is a question which 
those who deal thus with the Saviour's words, would do 
well seriously and timely to consider. 

It may be well to notice one more allegation, which 
has of late been strongly insisted on, and greatly confid- 
ed in, by many who wish the doctrine to be true which 
denies that there is any future punishment. In substance 
it is this ; viz. ' that inasmuch as Hades and Sheol, 
Tartarus and Gehenna, designate either imaginary regions 
which are supposed to be subterranean, or else literally 
the valley of Hinnom at Jerusalem ; it follows of course, 
that no real place of future punishment is named in the 
Scriptures; and if no place is pointed out, then we have 
reason to conclude thai there is none.' 

On this I remark, (1) That the same argument would 
prove, that since E->fcu3 or ovoavog, and D^B or naga- 
Sctoog, i. e. heaven and paradise, mean the region over our 
heads and a garden, therefore there is no place in which 
the righteous will be happy, unless it be in our atmos- 
phere or in some earthly garden. On this argu nent I 
have already said all that I wish to say. " What proves 
too much, proves nothing." 



General Remarks, 151 

(2) The laws of our Commonwealth declare, that the 
man who commits murder shall be punished with death, 
i. e. with hanging by the neck until death supervene. 
Now these same laws have no where said, in what place 
the gallows for hanging a murderer shall be erected ; nor 
even that any shall be erected. Suppose then I deduce 
from this, the conclusion that a murderer will not be pun- 
ished, because no place for his execution is designated. 
In reasoning thus, I do just what is done, when conclu- 
sions such as I am now examining, are made. 

Supposing it to be fact, that the Bible has no where 
named the place in which future punishment will be in- 
flicted ; does this even touch the question, whether 
there will be any future punishment? An answer to this 
is altogether superfluous. 

But the assumption itself is as ungrounded as the ar- 
gument. In proof of this, I must refer the reader to the 
preceding pages. It is labour worse than lost, then, to 
publish books to prove that there is no future punishment, 
by such an ungrounded and manifestly erroneous argu- 
ment as this. 

One more remark and I have done, for the present. 
Let the sober inquirer, who wishes to know the truth, 
review the meaning of aicov and alojviog, and ask, wheth- 
er the probability that future punishment will be endless, 
does not mount so high, that to call it in question is un- 
reasonable and hazardous ? And if so, then to believe 
in the salvation of all men, and to live in such a manner 
as those usually do who thus believe, is presumptuous be- 
yond the power of human language to express. 

If Universalists are in the right, we who believe in a 
doctrine very different from theirs, are nevertheless just 
as safe as they. We need not concern ourselves to ex- 



152 General Remarks . 

amine whether we are in the right or in the wrong as to 
opinion, since there can be no difference in the result, 
But if we are in the right, and they mistake fundamental- 
ly the meaning of God's word ; and mistake it through 
the spirit of unbelief, and through desire to live without 
that self-control and self-denial which the gospel de- 
mands on penalty of everlasting death ; then what is to 
be the end of all this ? 

Is there any other case, any one that pertains mere 
ly to the present world, in which a man of common un- 
derstanding and prudence, could justify a risk like that 
in the present case ? And are the interests of eternity 
to be more lightly regarded than those of time ? Is the 
fancied pleasure of the undisturbed gratification of sensual 
appetites, for a few days, to be put in serious competition 
with the interests of a period which has no end ? If so, 
then we may well say with the Scriptures, " Madness is 
in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to 
the dead." 

But O the never dying soul ! The judgement to come ! 
The summons to appear before that tribunal on which 
eternal justice is seated ! " Knowing the terrors of the 
Lord, we would fain persuade men." " It is indeed a 
fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, who 
is a consuming fire ;" who has said, " Vengeance is 
mine, I will repay." Blessed are those " over whom the 
second death hath no power !" Dreadful beyond the pow- 
er of language to describe, beyond what any human mind 
can possibly conceive, must be the condition of those, 
who will finally be cast into the lake of fire, which is the 
second death, and there be tormented with the beast and 
the feds e prophet, day and night, forever and ever. 



APPENDIX. 



While the preceding sheet was under the press, the Christian 
Examiner for Sept. 1830 came to hand ; which contains a piece 
occupying 25 pages, dated Sandwich, and subscribed E. S. G., 
making strictures on my remarks (p. 72 seq. of the present edition), 
which were formerly published in the Spirit of the Pilgrims for 
Aug. 1829. Inasmuch as I have taken the liberty to animadvert 
on Mr. G's first piece respecting aidrv and at&viog, it would seem 
to be no more than courteous, to make some answer to his recent 
suggestions. 

The tone and spirit of the whole piece, seem to me to exhibit a 
singular mixture of courteousness and irritability; now the aya-d-o- 
daiiiwv, and now the xaxodaluov (I mean no harm) seeming to be 
uppermost. But on the whole, the former appears to have the 
mastery ; and I am bound to believe him to be rather a good na- 
tured man than otherwise; especially considering the provocation 
that he had, which was no less than the contradicting of his main 
positions, and the endeavouring to pull down the corner-posts of 
his building. 

I have read with attention Mr. G's vindication, and must con- 
fess myself no better satisfied than with his first piece. An ex- 
amination in detail, my limits do not admit me to make. If Mr. 
G's main positions are not fast ones, and this can be shewn, I 
hope he will be satisfied that a minute and extended examination 
of all the particulars of his piece is required neither by the laws of 
argument nor of Christian courtesy. 

Mr. G. reproves me for saying that the ground of his transla- 
ting altar io g spiritual, is, that jEons (Alcovto) were counted as 
spiritual beings. He admits that he did refer to this, as being 
* an ancient and classic sense of the word ;' but he avers, that he 
did not rely upon it. 

As Mr. G's original piece can be consulted and compared with 
mine, by those who desire to do so, I will not endeavour to vindi- 
cate myself here. I cast myself on the judgement of the reader. 
He still maintains (p. 26), as he first did, that " atdtv means spiri- 



154 APPENDIX. 

tuality, in the more ancient Greek," and that j the Seventy proba- 
bly used it in a kindred sense in their version/ 

In opposition to this, I shall merely state, that no classic Lexi- 
con within the range of my consultation, gives such a sense to the 
word. Passow's Lexicon, the last and best of all, does not even 
advert to it. I have never met with it in any classic Greek wri- 
ter ; and consequently I must believe that no such meaning ever 
was attached to it in ancient Greek, until I see some evidence of it ; 
for no evidence has Mr. G. even attempted to offer. 

Mr. G. states that his principal reliance is on 1 John 5: 11, 12. 
3: 15 etc. ; together with some other texts of the like nature, but 
where the meaning spiritual, is rather probable than necessary, p. 
.22. He complains that I have left this unnoticed. 

I did so, because I could not conceive how the sentiment in 
these passages could have a bearing on the question whether alco- 
viog means spiritual. The sentiment in both seems to me plainly 
to be, that a state of happiness and peace (ton]) begins when the 
soul is truly reconciled to God, and continues forever. As to the 
first, we may compare John 3: 36, 18. Eph. 1: 12, 13. 4: 30. 2 Cor. 
5: 5. 1: 22, comp. Rom. 8: 23, also Rom. 5: 1 — 11. As to the 
second, viz. that the earnest of future blessedness here given to 
the children of God, is an earnest of blessedness which will have 
no end, see Rom. 5: 5—10. 8: 28—39. John 10: 27—30. Yet with 
all this admitted and taught, as it is, every where in the Bible, the 
Scriptures make a very wide distinction between the present and 
future state of happiness; see Rom. 8: 24, 25. 8: 18—23. 2 Cor. 4: 
16 — 18. 5: 1 — 5 ; which are only a specimen of a great multitude 
of texts of the same tenor. 

Now all which the texts relied on by Mr. G. can well be sup- 
posed to prove, is, that the happiness in question would haveno end. 
There is the same propriety in applying the sense eternal here, 
that there is in all the cases under § 10. No. 1, p. 46 above ; which 
I desire the reader to consult. One might just as well propose to 
exchange everlasting in all these cases for spiritual, as to do so here. 

It is a sound rule in philology, ' never to depart from the ordin- 
ary sense of a word, unless the context imperiously demands it.' 
What there is which demands it here, I cannot see. To say that 
spiritual would make good sense, is saying nothing to the purpose. 
In thousands of cases, where the adjective good is applied to God, 
almighty would make good sense ; and vice versa. And so of a 
multitude of other words. But after all the only question is, What 
sense did the writer mean to convey? Not, what may in itself be 
a good or true sense ? Mr. G. must admit this ; and admitting it, 
all which he has said about the word spiritual making good sense, 
falls at once to the ground. 

Mr. G's argument on p. 23 seq., has its basis in the supposed 
fact, that the Qreek classic language does employ aldniog in the 
sense of spiritual. He tries to shew how the philosophic meaning 
aconic, might become generalized by popular use so as to express 
spiritual simply. But still, orf&viog in the sense of aeonic and 
spiritual, is an utter stranger to classic Greek; the first ex* 



APPENDIX. 155 

ists only in the works of some Gnostic heretics, or rather of the 
patristic commentators on them ; and of the second, no certain ex- 
ample has yet been offered. 

In p. 25 seq. Mr. G. argues, after all, that the principal ground 
of investigating the true apostolic use of utwvtog, is the use of it by 
the Seventy, who regarded it as being correspondent to the He- 
brew teVl9 (C^t9). I accept the terms of contest here proposed, 
at once, and enter the lists with entire readiness. 

All turns now on the Hebrew word tViy. But this is surely 
as insecure a basis as Mr. G. could well ^choose. Among all the 
Lexicons of the Hebrew language, of which I have any knowl- 
edge, (and most of all that have enjoyed much reputation in the 
Christian world are among this number), I know of none that 
gives spirituality or spiritual as the meaning of fcVVi • I know of 
no passage, in the hundreds of places where this word is used in 
the Old Testament, in which the meaning in question seems in 
any degree probable. 

' But chv, in Hebrew, means something that is hidden, myste- 
rious, unsearchable, unknown;' it is ' well calculated, therefore, to 
express what is immaterial, intellectual, spiritual.' 

As to the mysterious, unsearchable, or unknown in the sense of 
being beyond the boundaries of knowledge, (which is here impli- 
ed), I know of no cases in which even the verb tVy certainly con- 
veys any of these meanings. To hide, to conceal, it does mean; 
but how remote this may be from mysterious and unsearchable , 
need not be said. 

Then, is there nothing mysterious or unsearchable, but spirit? 
For example ; the powers of nature, gravitation, electricity, mag- 
netism, the principles of vegetation, etc. ; is there no tV^3 here? 

Once more ; even all these meanings belong exclusively to the 
verb fc*?2, and not to the noun thh$ . Mr. G. has wholly over- 
looked this, and therefore committed a radical error in his philo- 
logical reasoning. He does not need, I trust, to be told, after all 
which lexicography has done, that nouns derived from verbs, or verbs 
from nouns, do, by usage, often acquire a sense entirely diverse 
from what their etymology would indicate. JJsus et jus et norma 
loquendi. 

But admitting all which he claims, it amounts to nothing ; for 
hidden or mysterious, can in no way be made necessarily to mean 
spiritual or intellectual. And even if they could, to argue from 
what might be to what is, i.e. from possibility to fact, would not 
seem to be very sound philology. 

A second argument against his view (exhibited on p. 74 above), 
is, that it would make spiritual happiness or misery to begin only 
after the general judgment. In respect to this, Mr. G. avows 
that I have totally misunderstood him. He says, that " in the ar- 
ticle in the Examiner, no allusion is intended to be made to any 
general judgment whatever. I do not believe there ever will be 
any. The assembled universe, so often spoken of as gathered be- 
fore the throne of God . . . . is, I believe, a mere i coinage' of the 



156 APPENDIX. 

human < brain.' Certainly the Scriptures assert no such thin n-," 
p. 30. 

This is coming out very frankly ; and I commend Mr. G. for 
saying what he thinks on this subject. But as to his opinion, viz. 
that ' the Scriptures assert no such thing as a general judgment,' 
I must merely ask the reader to open his Bible and examine Matt. 
7: 22. 25: 31—46. Acts 17: 31. Rom. 2: 5, 6 comp. with 2: 16. 
John 5: 22, 26—29. 2 Pet, 3: 8—13. Rev. 20: 11—15. I might 
multiply references of such a nature indefinitely; but these must 
be sufficient. If these do not establish the fact of a day of judg- 
ment, and of a general judgment, then I must acknowledge myself 
incapable of interpreting Scripture language. 

It is well indeed, that the public should know how far they will 
be required to go, in order to get rid of the argument to prove that 
t£L<oviog means eternal. I thank the write! in question for telling 
them this secret. 

In regard to the remainder of Mr. G.'s piece, I am entirety 
willing to let the subject rest where it is. The public have both 
sides before them, and can judge for themselves. 

Why has not Mr. G. once noticed the subject brought to view 
on p. 62 above ? How is he to prove that heaven is endless, or that 
God is eternal, ifaiutv and auonog fail to prove it ? Can not the 
like objections be made to any other words, applied to either of 
these, as to atcovLog, viz. that they are susceptible of another mean- 
ing ? 

Mr. G. wishes to know, how I can prove that the same means 
of grace are not used upon sinners in another world, as in this; 
nay, that more powerful means are not used, p. 43. 

My answer is ; The urgency with which acceptance of the 
calls of mercy are pressed here ; the awful considerations stated in 
such passao-es as Prov. 1: 24—28. Matt. 25: 31—46. Heb. 6: 4—6. 
10: 26—31. Luke 16: 19—26. Rev. 20: 10—15. 22: 11, 12, Heb. 9: 
27; the direct assertions that future punishment is incapable of 
remission, Mark 9: 43 — 48 and other like passages ; the " everlast- 
ing destruction from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his 
power," 2 Thess. 1:9; all these are proofs that the presence of God 
is not with the damned, in a gracious sense, and that there is no 
hope for them. I ask now for one single proof from all the Bible, 
to contradict this. This I asked before ; but Mr. G. has not prof- 
fered it. 

Mr. G. may conjecture one thing ; I have of course the same 
liberty to conjecture another. Mr. G. may use one argument a 
priori; I, another. But where is the end of all this? Mr. G. 
well knows that my creed is. The Scriptures are the suffi- 
cient and only rule of faith and practice. Whether he ad- 
mits or rejects this, I know not. But I can never be convinced 
that he is right in his positions, until I am convinced that the Bi- 
ble vouches for them ; and this I cannot ever see in a satisfactory 
manner, until it is made out in a way compatible with historical 
facts and philological principles. 






Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: August 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 652 0236O 



